HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » The Supreme Court Won't H...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 12:44 PM

The Supreme Court Won't Hear Appeal From National Organization For Marriage (NOM)

Source: Huffington Post

WASHINGTON The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear an appeal from a national anti-gay marriage group that tried to thwart Maine's campaign disclosure law requiring it to release its donor list.

The high court turned aside an appeal from the National Organization for Marriage, which donated $1.9 million to a political action committee that helped repeal Maine's same-sex marriage law.

Maine's campaign disclosure law requires groups that raise or spend more than $5,000 to influence elections to register and disclose donors. NOM contends that releasing the donor list would stymie free speech and subject donors to harassment, but the lower court refused to throw out the law.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/01/the-supreme-court-wont-he_n_1929105.html



The wins are coming fast and furious. What are they smoking???

30 replies, 4584 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 30 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Supreme Court Won't Hear Appeal From National Organization For Marriage (NOM) (Original post)
TrogL Oct 2012 OP
Raster Oct 2012 #1
cbayer Oct 2012 #2
closeupready Oct 2012 #14
SoapBox Oct 2012 #3
Liberal_Stalwart71 Oct 2012 #4
Mz Pip Oct 2012 #10
Liberal_Stalwart71 Oct 2012 #15
yardwork Oct 2012 #27
Liberal_Stalwart71 Oct 2012 #28
patrice Oct 2012 #5
Control-Z Oct 2012 #6
factsarenotfair Oct 2012 #8
Kber Oct 2012 #9
Surya Gayatri Oct 2012 #22
factsarenotfair Oct 2012 #25
factsarenotfair Oct 2012 #7
cstanleytech Oct 2012 #21
Dawson Leery Oct 2012 #11
Mnpaul Oct 2012 #12
SCVDem Oct 2012 #13
TrogL Oct 2012 #16
SCVDem Oct 2012 #19
AlbertCat Oct 2012 #17
Bohunk68 Oct 2012 #18
William769 Oct 2012 #20
oldsarge54 Oct 2012 #23
eallen Oct 2012 #24
Mnpaul Oct 2012 #30
hrmjustin Oct 2012 #26
sakabatou Oct 2012 #29

Response to TrogL (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 12:46 PM

1. Don't care what they are smoking, just keep on smokin'!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 12:51 PM

2. Excellent!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cbayer (Reply #2)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 01:57 PM

14. Agreed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 12:58 PM

3. Cool!

I'm amazed that they did this...figured that the 5 Activist Judges would rule against.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 01:00 PM

4. This is interesting. I sense something a bit more sinister in their motives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #4)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 01:25 PM

10. Like what? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mz Pip (Reply #10)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 02:11 PM

15. The five conservative justices refusing to hear the case? That's weird. I'm not sure

what's going on, but it's weird.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #4)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 03:48 PM

27. Well, the donor list is still being kept a secret and isn't likely to be released anytime soon.

This was a victory but it doesn't cost NOM anything. Equal marriage is back on the ballot in Maine this fall and NOM is contributing heavily to the opposition, and their donor lists are still secret. Another case is wending its way through the system and until that is resolved the NOM donor list stays sealed. The Supreme Court knew that their decision wouldn't change anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #27)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 03:52 PM

28. So, that's it, then. Since there will be ballot measures (there's one here in Maryland), it doesn't

make any difference for the SCOTUS to hear or not hear the case.

I knew there was something more to it than that.

It's not a victory until the states do the right thing. The SCOTUS must believe that these ballot measures won't pass, hence, the decision NOT to hear the case.

Interesting...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 01:02 PM

5. NOM. Cowards who want SECRET POWER over others' lives. That's fascism! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 01:02 PM

6. That's three wins

so far, that I count. The national forest lands regulations. Nebraska abortion case. Now this one. Have I missed any?

Keep it up, Supremes!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Control-Z (Reply #6)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 01:06 PM

8. Sholom Rubashkin Supreme Court Bid Denied (criminal matter-not political)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Control-Z (Reply #6)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 01:17 PM

9. What was the Nebraska case?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kber (Reply #9)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 03:32 PM

22. My question precisely!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to TrogL (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 01:04 PM

7. Has Chief Justice Roberts abandoned the rabid right permanently?

Wow, that would be great.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to factsarenotfair (Reply #7)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 03:29 PM

21. Dont get your hopes up. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 01:29 PM

11. NOM wants to know who is funding the pro-LGBT movement, yet

they do not want to disclose their financial supporters. Typical right wing attitude.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 01:31 PM

12. District court just did the opposite in Mn

Roberts should go along with disclosure. They said that states could pass these laws in the Citizens United decision.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 01:41 PM

13. What are they smoking?

I actually take offense at that characterization of being high with being stupid.

We have a costly War On Drugs which needs to end. Maybe they were drunk?!

Cannabis equals peaceful coexistence. Alcohol? Not so much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCVDem (Reply #13)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 02:46 PM

16. Sorry, it was crack I was thinking of

Or some of that bath salts stuff. Not sure if I'd want to see them naked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Reply #16)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 02:53 PM

19. Being a boomer

crack wasn't even on my mind, although you are right.

I never smoked crack although I had a bad night with someone who did. Zero to bat crap paranoid in 3 hits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCVDem (Reply #13)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 02:48 PM

17. actually take offense at that characterization of being high with being stupid.

Cannabis equals peaceful coexistence.

********

So... what are your views on smoking crack?

Pot isn't the only thing to smoke y'know.


And beside, the quip refers to them not acting like themselves, but doing the right thing, not being stupid.

Really, save your energy for some important battles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCVDem (Reply #13)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 02:49 PM

18. Good reply

I agree with you 100%. Drinking can make you stupid. Pot, just makes you take a little longer to be thoughtful about the answer. The saw of asking what one is smoking needs to be put in a drawer someplace.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 03:13 PM

20. Happily kicking and recommending this OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 03:39 PM

23. Proud Bible Thumpers

However they are not proud enough to declare themselves. Leaves me wonder who are they protecting? Stymie free speech, sorry freedom is one side of the coin for responsibility. If you are going to take a position, you are going to take the flack. Subject donors to harassment? Wow. These folks are PROUD of what they are doing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 03:41 PM

24. Remember: Citizens United upheld disclosure laws & invited Congress to do more there

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eallen (Reply #24)

Tue Oct 2, 2012, 12:03 AM

30. But over ruled them in Montana's case

They threw out a 103 yr old disclosure law

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 03:47 PM

26. Good!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 04:33 PM

29. Huzzuh!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread