What an Alabama Judge Is Doing to Some LGBTQ Lawyers Is Horrifying and Needs a Spotlight
Added 2024-05-27 08:41:04 +0000 UTCOA1036
Two great stories for you today - following OA1034 on how much Alito sucks, the Law Dork himself, Chris Geidner, is on to discuss the flag habits of Samuel Alito, as well as the exclusive story he broke regarding Alito’s stock activity immediately after Libs of TikTok called for a boycott against Bud Light because…transphobia. After we vent about Alito for a bit, Chris walks us through what an Alabama judge threatened to do to a group of LGBTQ+ lawyers and it’s even worse than you could imagine.
Be sure to follow Chris (@chrisgeidner/@chrisgeidner.bsky.social) and subscribe to his Substack to support independent legal journalism!
Law Dork's coverage of Judge Liles Burke's orders out of the US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
Comments
I'll repost when the rapid response friday comes up, but there's some blatant forum shopping in Texas, where professors in Houston are filing in Amarillo county to sue for the right to deny excused absences to students who get abortions. https://www.salon.com/2024/06/03/texas-professors-to-fail-students-seek-abortions/ https://media.aflegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/14184442/AmendedComplaint-1.pdf
Stormy Decisis says visit sharebannedbooks.com
2024-06-03 14:53:38 +0000 UTCI know this isnt a strait line for multiple reasons buttttt- how insanely aggravating is it that a portion of these Alabama LGBTQ+ lawyers seem to have gotten sanctioned so easily for doing nothing wrong when SOOOOO many lawyers on the right are running practices based in corruption and sanctionable actions out in the open and only get disbarred bc they were caught planning a coup (and really not even then)….I mean this f-ing system already?!!!
Reese
2024-05-29 16:09:10 +0000 UTCIt’s from a Key and Peele sketch.
Skiff
2024-05-28 17:02:13 +0000 UTCThe news coverage today about the pope using a gay slur is just like what Thomas was saying about the coverage of Alito. The bigger problem is that the pope opposes full acceptance of gay people. But it only grabs attention when someone drops a slur or flies a flag.
Quark Twain
2024-05-28 15:34:21 +0000 UTCThat wluld be all well and good, but when confronted with the rank corruption that Thomas and Alito engage in, they actively join the chorus saying everything on the court is fine and we should all ignore the bribery and extremism. They're in a position to call out the rot in the institution and instead join in trying (poorly) to conceal it.
Gmork
2024-05-28 05:16:11 +0000 UTCI have this totally out-there idea that maybe they just don't actually think about it in this/these ways - that after they've juriced their prudence, and fought for their liberal values as best they can on the subject matter in front of them, or in the dialogues they're invited into - they go home, spend time with their loved ones, and sleep at night.
I am a philosophical hole
2024-05-28 01:10:03 +0000 UTCThe liberal Justices are nothing but enablers to the six fascists who are destroying human rights at lightning speed. There is no salvaging this institution, there is no legacy these Justices will have except that they continued to give visual legitimacy to the court unlocking the nazi gate. They can brag about crying in private so as not to ruin decorum because that means more to them than the mass death of women who have pregnancy difficulties and the queer genocide the right is just beginning.
Apple Ventus
2024-05-27 23:26:19 +0000 UTCI think that's the Devils Advocate, but I don't believe keeping quiet is either effective nor why they're doing it. At the end of the day, the liberal (like the conservative) justices want to play act like they're all wise important jurists, and it does their grand legacy no favors to admit that they're just props in a hopelessly corrupt political body. Pretending Thomas and Alito and Roberts aren't corrupt isn't saving us from shit.
Gmork
2024-05-27 20:14:37 +0000 UTCmmmm... Chris' response is the first time I've considered maybe they're actually doing what's best, in being quiet
I am a philosophical hole
2024-05-27 20:04:13 +0000 UTCI don't know where most of these quotes come from... In turn, I figure that specific quote is true... But it seems to me like "but it's not illegal to not put up 'slippery floor' signs; just as it's not illegal to run on the floor when one of those signs is clearly displayed ... in either case, you take on the risk of the damage"
I am a philosophical hole
2024-05-27 20:02:23 +0000 UTC@Matt (or even, @Chris) - it was weird hearing Chris say that the /lawyers/ "dismissed" the 2 [affirmative care ban]-related cases, as opposed to "withdrawing" them, so for the first 5-10 minutes of the discussion I was confused about how the lawyers could have done any shopping in the first place... I thought judges dismissed cases, and lawyers withdrew them? Is this an Australia-terminology-only thing?
I am a philosophical hole
2024-05-27 19:56:28 +0000 UTCOk, how are us non-lawyers suppose to feel about what Alito is doing? I mean maybe it’s ok cause all the Gini and Clarence stuff is fine. I just don’t know
KeepingThePlatesSpinning
2024-05-27 15:57:49 +0000 UTCWow, that "it's not illegal to go to the bathroom with the seatbelt sign" quote aged quickly. Last I looked we had one dead and one spinal chord injury.
Whitty
2024-05-27 09:35:18 +0000 UTC1000% on board w Thomas about the disappointment in the liberal justices carrying water for ethical breaches.
Gmork
2024-05-27 09:32:38 +0000 UTCAny ETA on the next Gavel Gavel? I know the schedule has gotten a bit wonky lately, but would be nice to have a sense of it.
Graydon Armstrong
2024-05-27 09:01:49 +0000 UTC
