Skip to comments.
Legal move limits AG’s options to void Travis gay marriage
American Statesman ^
| 2/20/15
Posted on 02/20/2015 11:14:07 AM PST by Oliviaforever
To follow through on his promise to void Thursdays marriage between two Austin women, Attorney General Ken Paxton will have to file suit in state district court, most likely in Travis County. Thats because the lawyers for the women, Sarah Goodfriend and Suzanne Bryant, quietly dismissed the lawsuit that prompted state District Judge David Wahlberg to order county officials to give them a marriage license.
(Excerpt) Read more at m.statesman.com ...
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda; marriage; samesexmarriage
To: Oliviaforever
Just appeal to the Texas Supreme Court.
To: Oliviaforever
Just ignore it. Let the lezbos play house. I would focus my attention on the judge. I wouldn’t try to impeach him. I would make his life a living hell so that he regrets the day he was born.
3
posted on
02/20/2015 11:24:09 AM PST
by
Cowboy Bob
(Isn't it funny that Socialists never want to share their own money?)
To: Oliviaforever
Obviously, Sarah is much more than a good friend-and the judge needs to be ostracized-can we still do that? I want homosexuals to go back in the closet-and for someone to lock the damned door as soon as they do...
4
posted on
02/20/2015 11:31:31 AM PST
by
Texan5
("You've got to saddle up your boys, you've got to draw a hard line"...)
To: Oliviaforever
Forget that. It's "voided", past tense, done. No need to file diddly. I would, however, put the hammer down on Judge David Wahlberg for being a judicial activist. Time for him to go. Dredge up the procedure for judicial impeachment ... begin today. That would be the contemporary equivalent of a tar-n-feathering.
5
posted on
02/20/2015 11:32:49 AM PST
by
so_real
( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
To: Oliviaforever; All
Thank you for referencing that article Oliviaforever. Please bear in mind that the following critique is directed at the article and not at you.
"Legal move limits AGs options to void Travis gay marriage"
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponents Argument
Legal manuevering to ignore the voiding of the gay marriage aside, it remains that the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect gay issues, gay marriage in this example. So the states are free to exercise their 10th Amendment-protected powers to make laws to prohibit constitutionally unprotected gay marriage, imo, as long as such laws do not also unreasonably abridge constitutionally enumerated rights.
To: Cowboy Bob
The State Legislature can impeach.
And he would run again and get elected.
To: Oliviaforever
These criminal liberal activists did this in a backroom type deal with no warning or heads up to anybody.
Liberals NEVER GIVE UP and go around the law when it suits them.
They can have whatever they want removed or sewn on, but when they reach their final JUDGEMENT, they will be how He made them and their "marriage" will NEVER be approved.
8
posted on
02/20/2015 11:39:56 AM PST
by
red-dawg
Comment #9 Removed by Moderator
To: red-dawg
“Liberals NEVER GIVE UP”
Do you ever give up?
To: Oliviaforever
the lawyers for the women, Sarah Goodfriend and Suzanne Bryant, quietly dismissed the lawsuit that prompted state District Judge David Wahlberg to order county officials to give them a marriage license That doesn't make sense.
11
posted on
02/20/2015 12:12:29 PM PST
by
smokingfrog
( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
To: 5th MEB
12
posted on
02/20/2015 12:13:16 PM PST
by
smokingfrog
( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
To: Oliviaforever
They are going to want a divorce in about 6 months . . . nah, maybe they’ll stay together just to be a political vanguard. Such a happy lifestyle.
To: Oliviaforever
Not like the GOPe does, caving in the face of any slight obstacle.
14
posted on
02/20/2015 12:27:59 PM PST
by
red-dawg
To: red-dawg
Liberals NEVER GIVE UP... Excuse me but you have me confused with somebody else.
15
posted on
02/20/2015 12:38:46 PM PST
by
nevergiveup
(When in Rome, speak Roman.)
To: smokingfrog
“That doesn’t make sense.”
Now that they are married, there is no need to continue the case.
To: Oliviaforever
17
posted on
02/20/2015 12:50:20 PM PST
by
bgill
(CDC site, "we still do not know exactly how people are infected with Ebola")
To: Oliviaforever
Oh, I comprende now. thanks.
18
posted on
02/20/2015 12:57:43 PM PST
by
smokingfrog
( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
To: smokingfrog
I don’t understand it either. Why would they need to “quietly dismiss” it when the judge gave them what they were filing the lawsuit for?
19
posted on
02/20/2015 1:32:47 PM PST
by
Burkean
(.)
To: Oliviaforever
The Texas Supreme Court has already voided these improper “marriage” licenses.
This is the Austin Pravda reporting, nothing they write can be believed. They will not report the truth even if the continuance of their business requires it.
20
posted on
02/20/2015 2:00:40 PM PST
by
fwdude
(The last time the GOP ran an "extremist," Reagan won 44 states.)
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson