Kim Davis a political prisoner?

[wolfie]

On the other hand, apparently the Oath keepers are promising to 'protect' her. These are the same 'nice' folks from the Bundy Ranch standoff. They are now saying their going to fight the U.S. Marshalls if they attempt to arrest Kim Davis again, citing that her getting jailed was 'unlawful'.

If the Oath Keepers manage to spark an armed confrontation, that'll probably be the final straw to getting them declared a terrorist organization. I wonder what charges the survivors will face in addition to attempted murder and interfering with a police officer carrying out his duties.

[Gravekeeper]

She's now asking the 6th circuit court of appeals to halt the order by the trial judge that forced her office to actually issue marriage licenses to everyone legally eligible ( as opposed to just the couples that sued ). Which would, again, stop her office from issuing marriage licenses to gay couples.

She's gonna end up right back in that cell pretty quick at the rate she's going.

Also, she is legitimately just a fucking awful person.

[Andrew B]

She and Huckabee are getting sued by Survivor for the use of the song "Eye of the Tiger".

http://nbc.com.co/survivor-files-1-2...mike-huckabee/

[KabeRinnaul]

She and Huckabee are getting sued by Survivor for the use of the song "Eye of the Tiger".

http://nbc.com.co/survivor-files-1-2...mike-huckabee/

Unfortunately, and to my great disappointment, that's not actually true.

[Andrew B]

Sorry. I didn't know about the fake .co thing some people are doing. I'll be in the corner of shame if you need me.

[Gravekeeper]

They did tell Huckabee and Davis to stop using their music and go fuck themselves, basically. But they haven't sued.

They should though. ;p

[TheHuckster]

I'm going to expect a cease and desist / lawsuit from nbc.com to nbc.com.co pretty soon, though.

I admit falling for it myself, and I stupidly left the tab open overnight. I came back to find the tab was replaced by a rather spammy and ugly attempt at hijacking my computer, which my antivirus quickly neutralized. I suggest you watch out with that site, too.

[Racket_Man]

A non-profit group has rented a billboard in Mrs. Davis's town and put up a nice sign concerning some "changes" in society vs. literal interpitation of religious texts.

YES it is safe for work

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/bil...7v7?li=AAa0dzB

[Tama]

Oh, I bet she is hopping mad...

[Hyena Dandy]

Couldn't the judge issue a restraining order for her on entering her workplace?

I do understand the reason that they feel that fines wouldn't be enough, but I also think sending her to jail/back to jail is/was a bit much. It's worth noting that even the ACLU had argued that they didn't want her sent to jail on the matter.

Personally, I believe that jail/prison should be used only to stop people from the problematic behavior. While she can't be removed from office, and the goal is to keep her from continuing to interfere with what goes on in the office, it would seem that this isn't a case where she's a danger to society, just that there's one place (i.e. Her work) where she was causing issues. I'd think that surely they could keep her out of the office without stopping her from going to Burger King or Dominos or Panera or wherever she eats dinner... You know, maybe I'm too hungry to concentrate on the post.

Anyway, is there a reason that she couldn't have just had a restraining order? I think judges have a lot of leeway on civil cases like that, ya?

[Gravekeeper]

Personally, I believe that jail/prison should be used only to stop people from the problematic behavior. While she can't be removed from office, and the goal is to keep her from continuing to interfere with what goes on in the office, it would seem that this isn't a case where she's a danger to society, just that there's one place (i.e. Her work) where she was causing issues.

Well, here's the problem:

Contempt of court must have an undesirable consequence or there would be little incentive to comply with a lawful court order and shit would fall apart pretty fast in the US legal system. Davis is not only going against the law of the land and the Supreme Court but actively interfering with it. That's serious shit from a legal perspective. If some random fuckwit from the ass end of no where can defy the highest court in the land and still go to Burger King than it doesn't exactly hold much weight, does it?

In the case of civil contempt such as this the consequences must be persuasive to compliance with the court order. Its not suppose to be punitive its suppose be coercive. Its hard to coerce someone to comply with the law if they can still go to Burger King. Ultimately, contempt of court can't not carry a significance consequence or else it would be meaningless and ineffectual as a legal tool.

As for a restraining order, no, that's not really what restraining orders are for or how they work. You're suggesting, in essence, that the office of an elected official requires physical protections from the official who was elected by the people to serve it. That would be one heck of a legal precedent to set.

Plus a restraining order comes with a lot of automatic legal restrictions regardless of the subject or cause. It would, for example, prevent her from legally owning firearms or ammunition.

[KabeRinnaul]

Its hard to coerce someone to comply with the law if they can still go to Burger King.

I know you're using "go to Burger King" as a random action to represent the capability to go about one's everyday life unimpeded, but I can't help but be amused by the implication that the Whopper is the single greatest freedom Americans enjoy.

[jedimaster91]

They are pretty delicious.

I get what HD is saying, though. Her deputy clerks (save for one) are fine with issuing the licenses, so keeping her interference out of the office seems like a good solution. Jail clearly didn't change her mind about issuing the licenses herself, so in essence, it did nothing. Though FWIW, she isn't interfering with her deputies anymore.....

....But she did remove her name/authority from the paperwork. Not quite sure if that's going to matter in the long run.

[Kheldarson]

....But she did remove her name/authority from the paperwork. Not quite sure if that's going to matter in the long run.

She's trying to say it does, but it's been replaced by a note about federal mandate, which is all her office stands for anyway. So I really doubt it will. They've been federally recognized.

[Jetfire]

Just to make sure the altered certificates are legal, the ACLU is looking to make sure it's crystal clear.

A good move all in all; get it sorted out now while it's in everyone's mind, as opposed to squishing out fires in the future because some paper pusher decides they are NOT proper and tries to deny benefits at an important time.