Welcome to the community for independent journalism, a place to post and engage with diverse, free news media from around the world.
The rundown:
Posts should link to a current* article from a credible independent news source. If there's a paywall, please put the official link in the URL box and add an archive link in the text body of your post. Blogs, editorials and reports are allowed.
Post title should be the article headline or best fit. Add this tag if people need an account for access: [sign-in required.]
No misinformation or bigotry.
Be civil. Be respectful. Be cool. Instance rules apply.
Tag NSFW at your discretion.
*Independent journalism is generally free from government and corporate interests and is not controlled by a major media conglomerate. "Independence" is a gradient, so use your best judgement when posting.
*Current depends on whether new, publicly available information has been released since the article has last been updated. When in doubt please add the published date to the title in a tag [like this.]
For a less serious news community, check out: https://sh.itjust.works/c/wildfeed
Both communities were created with the goal of increasing media pluralism. Feel free to share and contribute.
This isn't necessarily a rebuke of her position on gay marriage...only that they are letting the settlement decision against her, stand. She did violate their rights according to the law, so she must pay the damages.
.. for now. It probably just wasn't the 'right' case to let them weasel their way around to doing it.
Told ya they'd drop it with no comment. It's a weak case to begin with and not one they want to set precedent upon.
It was weak, but the fact it gained so much support is troubling. There are well funded interest groups who look for worthy contenders to puppet against the supreme court for these kinds of challenges.
Her lawyers are part of it: https://lc.org/