Posted on 09/03/2015 1:05:31 PM PDT by z taxman
The fact that he (and so many others) is 'ok' with sodomite marriage is the reason this woman is behind bars. The sodomites are using the SC decision to 'target' her.
Why haven’t they jailed the Muslim stewardess who refuses to serve alcohol to passengers on her plane?
Every commercial break on the radio is about the clerk. Now they are claiming she is being aggressive because she won’t allow her charges to issue the licenses. As I understand it, her name would be on the licenses. Regardless, she was elected and a marriage amendment was approved by the state. The law is on her side. Defiance is not hers. It is the court’s. The justices should be held in contempt of the law.
Actually, that isn't true. The contempt power is used to force compliance, and once it becomes clear that compliance will not be forthcoming, the contempt power is, in principle, exhausted. The time interval for this is typically on the order of weeks or months, and in no event does it extend for a year.
There must be some mistake. Justice Kennedy assured us this couldn’t happen.
That's the reason the judge put her in jail, to avoid having a fine paid off by others.
Read a little about Afghan "dancing boys" (bacha bazi) before you state that too forcefully.
Well, yeah there is that, but regardless of what the jokers in the national office do or don’t do, every single Republican candidate could be out there making hay out of this on the campaign trail.
Are you sure about that?
Doesn’t it depend whether it is “civil” or “criminal” contempt? I think “civil” contempt has no set limit on the duration of the sentence and can continue indefinitely until compliance is forthcoming.
What about this guy?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._Beatty_Chadwick
Served 14 years for a contempt charged he wouldn’t comply with.
He thinks it a local issue, it's not. This is a national issue and the heart of the issue is who get to define moral and immoral. Traditionally natural law or G*d law defined morality. Not any longer now man via the Supreme court define moral behavior in defiance of G*d teaching. This is a very big deal since a moral people will not obey immoral law. If fact a moral people have a duty to disobey immoral laws. Paul totally misses the real issue.
I used to like Paul but now I see him as a light weight.
On July 10, 2009, Chadwick was ordered released from prison by Delaware County Judge Joseph Cronin, who determined his continued incarceration had lost its coercive effect and would not result in him surrendering the money.
And that, I think, is THE issue here - separation of powers. The fact that she is the elected County Clerk is an extremely big deal, according to the Constitution. Those who point out that she's no different than the SF City Council for creating a "Sanctuary City" are mostly right, except she has the 1st Amendment behind her, and SF doesn't.
Couldn’t the governor let her loose via an EO?
You left out the rope and a tree.
No. The contempt power belongs to the court alone. No statute involved, so there is no criminal violation. Contempt is a prerogative of the court, and is entirely in its control.
If the court abuses this power, it undermines its legitimacy both according to its own rules, and also in the eyes of the public.
Complicating the situation in this case is that the offended judge is a federal judge, outside of the reach of the state. I assume the clerk is incarcerated in a federal facility. If she is incarcerated in a state facility, or if the judge orders the state to incarcerate her, then yes, the governor can tell the feds to stuff it.
“absurd to put someone in jail for exercising their religious liberties”
The same could be said in reference to civil suits against bakers who refuse to make homosexual wedding cakes!
She wasn’t jailed for breaking a law. She was jailed for contempt of court by refusing the judge’s order to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples.
As an elected official she can’t be fired and must be impeached to be removed from office. From what I’ve read she would be re-elected if she chose to run again as most of her county supports her.
Judges can’t make-up law from the bench, although many do.
“Sounds as though the judge is inventing law from the bench.”
Just like the Supreme Court.
Fish rot from the head down...
Well, the principle may be there, but if people can still be incarcerated for that long before some other judge steps in and applies it, then I think, in practice, they can probably keep this woman locked up a long time.
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.