Kim Davis Is Back And Losing All Of The Lawsuits
Welp, Kim Davis is back.
Don't worry, she isn't, like, running for public office, or even really doing much of anything. But she's back in the news, which means we had to remember that she exists, and that's never really a good time.
On the other hand, Davis is back in the news because she and the Commonwealth of Kentucky got their asses handed to them, and that actually IS a good time!
In a pair of decisions from the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, Kim Davis got properly benchslapped for her blatant violation of the US Constitution.
Davis is represented in these cases by the nutjobs over at Liberty Counsel, the "religious liberty" organization that specializes in hate speech and discrimination. And it's always fun to watch them get smacked around a little, too.
Miller v. Davis
In Miller v. Davis, the ACLU represents four couples whose constitutional and civil rights were violated when Davis decided to go full homophobe and refuse to issue marriage licenses after Obergefell made marriage equality the law nationwide.
Back when this all happened, Kentucky's asshole Governor, Matt Bevin, praised Davis and called her bigotry "an inspiration ... to the children of America." And his general counsel said "Bevin doesn't believe Davis acted unconstitutionally and continues to support her actions." Despite that, the commonwealth tried to get out of footing the bill for Davis's indefensible actions, claiming Davis wasn't a state actor when she blatantly violated the law. On Friday, the Sixth Circuit said, "Sorry, Matt, it's time to pony up."
Here's how the court described what happened in Miller:
Under the "American Rule," parties typically pay their own attorney's fees. Congress created an exception, though, for plaintiffs who win cases against government officials over civil-rights violations. Here, plaintiffs applied for marriage licenses only to find that Kim Davis, who oversaw marriage licensing for Rowan County, Kentucky, wouldn't issue them. So they sued her for infringing their constitutional right to marry, and the district court ordered Davis to give them what they wanted. Once they obtained licenses (or chose not to seek them again), they chose not to pursue the lawsuit any further. But they did pursue attorney's fees, which the district court awarded and required the Commonwealth of Kentucky to pay.
The defendants tried to argue that no one should have to pay for the plaintiffs' attorneys fees, but the court shut them down pretty hard. The next issue was who should have to pay -- the commonwealth, the county, or Davis. Because issuing marriage licenses is the responsibility of the commonwealth, the court ruled Kentucky had to pay.
So the ACLU has a nice $222,695 coming its way, courtesy of the Commonwealth of Kentucky.
Ermold v. Davis
Ermold v. Davis is a second suit related to Davis's fuckery after Obergefell. That case is at a much earlier stage than Miller and the issue here was whether Davis can be sued by two other couples for violating their constitutional rights.
There's a shitty doctrine called qualified immunity that shields government officials from being sued for damages in a lot of circumstances. We could rant about it all day, but because we're here to celebrate Kim Davis being held accountable for her actions, we'll spare you. Suffice it to say, it helps shitty people get away with shitty things all the time.
But it doesn't apply here! As the court put it:
For a reasonable official, Obergefell left no uncertainty [about the law]. For Davis, however, the message apparently didn't get through. And it still doesn't appear to have gotten through: She now argues that Obergefell doesn't even apply to her conduct.
As you can probably tell from that language, the Sixth Circuit was not particularly amused with Davis's arguments, here.
But that's not all! Davis also tried to argue that Obergefell didn't apply to her, because the couples could have gone to other Kentucky counties to exercise their constitutional rights. The court didn't take kindly to that argument, either.
Davis provides no legal authority for that proposition. We can find none. And we know why: that's not how qualified immunity works, and that's not how constitutional rights work.
THAT'S NOT HOW THE CONSTITUTION WORKS, KIM!
Nice Times!
It sucks that these cases have to be brought, but it's always great to see hateful assholes get what's coming to them. And the ACLU is about to get a $223,000 donation from the Commonwealth of Kentucky.
DOJ <3 Discrimination Against Trans People
Trump's DOJ is at it again! In a brief filed Friday, the Department of Justice argues to the Supreme Court in Harris Funeral Homes vs. EEOC that trans people deserve to be discriminated against. It also throws in some arguments that would allow all kinds of discrimination against all women, because why not?
Somehow, the DOJ's brief managed to be even worse than I expected.
Their logic seems to rest on two main contentions. First is that a transgender woman is actually a man who can legally be forced to present as male in the workplace. Second is that transgender people, as a class, can legally be discriminated against. They also argue that the court ruling for the woman in this case, who was fired simply for being a transgender woman, "would transform Title VII into a blanket prohibition on all sex-specific workplace practices" -- and that, apparently, is a bad thing.
You Guys, The Fifth Circuit Ruled *For* The Welfare Of Indian Children
Something weird happened last week: The Fifth Circuit US Court of Appeals did something ... good.
Yeah, it's weird.
Texas Governor-in-Waiting/Attorney General Ken Paxton, joined by the AGs of Louisiana and Indiana, is suing in an attempt to get courts to declare that white people have a right to steal Native American kids from their families and redistribute them amongst themselves. A district court judge obliged. Then, last week, the Fifth Circuit pushed back.
If I think too long about what it means that the Fifth Circuit is the voice of reason, here, I might start to bleed from my ears. So instead I'm just going to raise my glass to this rare Nice Time brought to us courtesy of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Donald Trump REALLY Doesn't Want You To See His Tax Returns
At the end of July, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 27, the Presidential Tax Transparency and Accountability Act, which requires candidates for president and governor to release their tax returns to appear on the California primary ballot. So naturally, Trump is suing to keep his skeevy finances private.
As The Root so aptly put it:
President Donald Trump once claimed that if he wasn't being audited he'd have no problem showing his tax returns. While tax-return flashing isn't a requirement to be president, it's been the unspoken norm that all presidents since Richard Nixon have adhered to. As it stands, Trump is the only modern president not to release his tax returns, and most likely that's because he listed Russian prostitute urine as a write-off.
Spurred by Trump's refusal to release his tax returns -- including to the House Ways and Means Committee -- states around the country have sprung into action. New York passed a law that would allow its Department of Taxation and Finance to give Ways and Means an individual's state tax returns upon request. Trump already filed a batshit insane lawsuit to try to stop that one. So add in California, and the president is involved in lawsuits on both coasts to try to stop people from seeing his taxes. Troubling, you say? Pshaw.
But Trump isn't the only one suing. A handful of suits have been filed over SB 27, by Trump, the RNC and California Republican Party, and our buddies over at Judicial Watch. As you might imagine, the complaints are chock full of little gold nuggets.
But with regard to the constitutionality of this new law ... *takes deep breath* ... Donald Trump, the GOP, and Judicial watch might actually have a point, here.
(No, I can't believe I just typed those words, either.)
The 2019 Puerto Rico Governor Hunger Games Have A Winner! (For Now)
So Puerto Rico has now had three governors (the equivalent of the president in any other country) in a week. Take that, mainland United States Congress!!!
After the Puerto Rico Supreme Court found that Pedro Pierluisi was unconstitutionally sworn-in as governor and told to him vacate La Fortaleza (The Fortress, the name of the governor's mansion in Old San Juan), Wanda Vazquez Garced became the Governor of Puerto Rico. On his way out, Pierluisi released a taped statement that appeared to be filmed in front of a green screen:
Or on the set of Lex Luthor's library in Richard Donner's Superman.
Even had Otis doing sign language!
