Jump to content

Federal Judge rules that Tennesse's drag ban is unconstitutional, strikes it down


Aston Martin

Recommended Posts

https://www.losangelesblade.com/2023/06/03/federal-judge-rules-tennessee-drag-ban-is-unconstitutional/

 

The judge ordered a temporary injunction that suspended the bill going into effect back in April after a LGBTQ theater company sued the state for it. After the case went to trial, the same judge struck it down, citing its violation of the First Amendment as the reason. Happy Pride! 

Edited by Aston Martin
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

W Judge :clap3:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that judge said 

spacer.png

Edited by samsclubPRESENTSavam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love to see bigots lose. :clap3:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why these state bans won't work the federal judges won't allow it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Insanity said:

That's why these state bans won't work the federal judges won't allow it

Sometimes it all depends on the judges in certain states though. 
 

There’s a bunch of Christian nationalists fascists on federal benches appointed by GWB and Trump in Texas for example

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taylor's impact :clap3:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bears01 said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Parker_(judge)
 

A trump appointed judge at that :bloo: oh well, he followed the law and did his job, so kudos :clap3:

Yeah, reading his ruling you can tell:

Quote

After considering the briefs and evidence presented at trial, the Court finds that—despite Tennessee’s compelling interest in protecting the psychological and physical wellbeing of children—the Adult Entertainment Act (“AEA”) is an UNCONSTITUTIONAL restriction on the freedom of speech.”

 

“The Court concludes that the AEA is both unconstitutionally vague and substantially overbroad. The AEA’s “harmful to minors” standard applies to minors of all ages, so it fails to provide fair notice of what is prohibited, and it encourages discriminatory enforcement. The AEA is substantially overbroad because it applies to public property or “anywhere” a minor could be present

He struck it down because the bill was so poorly written and obviously discriminatory. Give this same judge an insidious and well-crafted discriminatory bill, he’ll uphold it.

Edited by Headlock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Headlock said:

Yeah, reading his ruling you can tell:

He struck it down because the bill was so poorly written and obviously discriminatory. Give this same judge an insidious and well-crafted discriminatory bill, he’ll uphold it.

Looking at how he was voted on, he seems to be a fairly normal judge (probably with a slight hint of right leaning bias, but not extreme). https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1152/vote_115_2_00005.htm
 

Everyone from Bernie to Ted Cruz voted to confirm him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Headlock said:

Yeah, reading his ruling you can tell:

He struck it down because the bill was so poorly written and obviously discriminatory. Give this same judge an insidious and well-crafted discriminatory bill, he’ll uphold it.

What matters is he didn't approve it and we won (for now)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is how so many right wing bills go lately. I am not saying that none get through at all because they do. But so many are clearly virtue signaling for voters they know won't survive courts and get's people riled up and talking to help build their political profile. My first thought any time I see a bill pass before being annoyed or angry is does this even have a chance of surviving the courts? Honestly half the time I know that stuff won't 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/3/2023 at 2:39 PM, If U Seek Amy said:

This is how so many right wing bills go lately. I am not saying that none get through at all because they do. But so many are clearly virtue signaling for voters they know won't survive courts and get's people riled up and talking to help build their political profile. My first thought any time I see a bill pass before being annoyed or angry is does this even have a chance of surviving the courts? Honestly half the time I know that stuff won't 

On the contrary, a lot of these people think the courts will side with them, especially the SCOTUS. Republicans are not known for having the foresight to think ahead in terms of the consequences of their actions so they do stuff like this thinking nobody can touch them.

 

But other than that, you are right. It is all virtue signaling. None of these bills help anyone, make anyone's life easier, etc. It is all about appealing to the base.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i hope this sends a clear signal that trans/gay rights can't be your top priority debate in the general election.  It seems they focus more on this then the border or inflation.  It's gonna be a losing strategy just like abortion was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:clap3:

 

 

These uglees focus on this when they literally have gun shows out in the open

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.