LifeNews: “David Cortman, an attorney for the Alliance Defense Fund, told the newspaper he supported the judge’s order. ‘It basically grants us all the relief that we were looking for,’ he said. He also said the order from the judge makes it clear that abortion center staff can’t stand inside the 15-foot zone and harass pro-life advocates. ‘One of the reasons that we challenged the fixed zone is that, on the face of it, it was based on content,’ he said. ‘It allowed some people to speak but not others.’”
- Posted: 12/18/2009
- |
- Category: ADF in the News
- |
- Source: www.lifenews.com
- Tags: ADF: David Cortman, ADF: Media Clips, Category: Sanctity of Life, State: Pennsylvania, Topic: Abortion, ZZ: Brown v City of Pittsburgh
UPI: “Five years after marrying in Massachusetts, Angelique Naylor’s spouse is contesting the split, arguing that since Texas doesn’t recognize same-sex marriage, the dissolution shouldn’t be recognized either, KXAN-TV, Austin, reported.”
- Posted: 12/18/2009
- |
- Category: Marriage & Family
- |
- Source: www.upi.com
- Tags: Category: Marriage and Family, State: Texas, Topic: Divorce, Topic: Homosexual Agenda, Topic: Marriage
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: “Pittsburgh can ban abortion debates and demonstrations within 15 feet of a medical facility entrance, but it can no longer prevent advocates from walking up to people outside that buffer zone, a federal judge ruled Thursday . . . David Cortman, an attorney for the Alliance Defense Fund, the Christian legal organization representing Brown, commended the judge’s order. ‘It basically grants us all the relief that we were looking for,’ he said.”
- Posted: 12/18/2009
- |
- Category: ADF in the News
- |
- Source: www.pittsburghlive.com
- Tags: ADF: David Cortman, ADF: Media Clips, Alliance Defense Fund, Category: Sanctity of Life, State: Pennsylvania, Topic: Abortion, ZZ: Brown v City of Pittsburgh
Queerty: “The Alliance Defense Fund, which is representing the Huguenins, has promised to appeal. And we actually agree with ADF senior counsel Jordan Lorence’s argument: ‘Christians in the marketplace should not be subject to predatory legal attacks for simply abiding by their beliefs. The Constitution prohibits the state from forcing unwilling artists to promote a message they disagree with and thereby violate their conscience. Should the government force a videographer who is an animal rights activist to create a video promoting hunting and taxidermy? American small business owners do not surrender their constitutional rights at the marketplace gate, nor can the government make people choose between their faith and their livelihood.’”
- Posted: 12/18/2009
- |
- Category: Uncategorized
- |
- Source: www.queerty.com
- Tags: ADF: Jordan Lorence, ADF: Media Clips, Category: Religious Freedom, State: New Mexico, Topic: Homosexual Agenda, ZZ: Elane Photography LLC v Willock
San Diego Gay and Lesbian News: “Tuesday the Imperial County Board of Supervisors, in a 3-2 vote, moved to intervene in the Federal court case challenging Prop 8’s constitutionality . . . Mr. Wally also informed me that he was approached by the Alliance Defense Fund (the anti-equality guys with money) to bring the issue to the board with the promise that they would pay all of the county’s expenses with regards to the case. This, I must mention, is a good sign for our side. Our opposition is so desperate for support that they sought out a small county to help add legitimacy to their case.”
- Posted: 12/18/2009
- |
- Category: Uncategorized
- |
- Source: sdgln.com
- Tags: Category: Marriage and Family, State: California, Topic: Homosexual Agenda, ZZ: Perry v. Brown
David Limbaugh writes at Townhall: “I’m wondering whether there’s anyone out there with the guts to pretend that it’s insignificant that President Barack Obama keeps appointing radical after radical to his czar positions. Can anyone honestly say Obama’s appointments don’t tell us a great deal about Obama himself — as if we needed any further proof he is a left-wing extremist?”
- Posted: 12/18/2009
- |
- Category: Miscellaneous
- |
- Source: townhall.com
- Tags: Topic: Nominations, Topic: White House
The Hill: “I would have less of a voice and I would have less respect if I voted for things I didn’t believe in because of pressure from the leadership,” DeFazio told The Hill in an interview. Obama himself has taken notice. ‘Don’t think we’re not keeping score, brother,’ Obama told DeFazio during a closed-door meeting of the House Democratic Caucus, according to members afterward.”
- Posted: 12/18/2009
- |
- Category: Miscellaneous
- |
- Source: thehill.com
- Tags: Topic: Congress, Topic: Politics, Topic: White House
Robert M. Weaver, Queer Law for the Straight Guy: The Affect of Lawrence on Fornication and Adultery Statutes (December 15, 2009). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1523702
“This Article inteprets the 2003 Lawrence v. Texas case on the majority’s own terms and in the context of the Court’s struggle to justify judicial review for unenumerated substantive rights. It argues that Lawrence is just as much of a “fundamental rights” case as the Court’s other cases recognized as ‘fundamental rights’ cases (Cruzan, Casey, Roe). It gives an identity-centered interpretation of the Court’s unenumerated substantive rights cases based on the majority’s focus on autonomy, human dignity, and liberty.”
- Posted: 12/18/2009
- |
- Category: Marriage & Family
- |
- Source: ssrn.com
- Tags: Category: Marriage and Family, Topic: Homosexual Agenda, Topic: Legal Periodicals, Topic: Pornography
Peter L. Strauss, Our Twenty-First Century Constitution (December 16, 2009). Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc, Vol. 62, No. 121, 2009. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1524560
“Accommodating our Eighteenth Century Constitution to the government that Congress has shaped in the intervening two and a quarter centuries, Professor Strauss argues, requires accepting the difference between the President’s role as ‘Commander in Chief’ of the Nation’s military, and his right to seek written opinions from those Congress has empowered to administer domestic laws under his oversight. Thus, the question for today is not whether the PCAOB offends Eighteenth Century ideas about government structure, but the question asked by Professors Bruff, Lawson, and Pildes – whether the relationships between PCAOB and SEC, SEC and President meet the constitutional necessity for effective presidential oversight of the execution of federal law or not.”
- Posted: 12/18/2009
- |
- Category: Bench & Bar
- |
- Source: ssrn.com
- Tags: Category: Bench and Bar, Topic: Jurisprudence, Topic: Legal Periodicals
Whitney E. Easton, Proving a Negative: Rousseau and Madison’s Fear of Factionalism as Interpreted by Berlin’s Two Concepts of Liberty (December 16, 2009). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1524157
“As will be discussed further, in The Federalist Papers 10, Madison outlines the fear that social forces left unchecked, can lead to a form of factionalism with the potential to subvert property rights and to impose religious ideology on the citizens of the United States. The Federalist Papers 10 thus advocates for a republican form of government to ‘cool the passions’ of those who would infringe upon the rights of the individual. Republicanism, for Madison, creates a buffer between those who in a direct democracy may make poor decisions, and the educated elite who understand the true interests of the citizen and the nation. On the other end of the spectrum Rousseau who also fears factionalism, advocates for a direct democracy that would lead to the discernment of the general will of the people and thus the true good that would be in the interest of the society as a whole. This advocacy of what is good for society based on some notion of reason that is not just instrumental, leads to a collectivism that is best defined as positive liberty. Rousseau’s fear of factions is based on a refutation of egoist self-interest while Madison’s protests rest on a fear of collectivist social forces. Both authors come to the same conclusion on creating a buffer or an impediment in democratic societies that would prevent the individualizing or communalizing forces of society from changing the basic structure each author prescribes. Far from being decided, this debate between self-interest, factionalism, negative and positive liberty, the social good and the individual still lingers on across the world.”
- Posted: 12/18/2009
- |
- Category: Miscellaneous
- |
- Source: ssrn.com
- Tags: Topic: History, Topic: Jurisprudence, Topic: Legal Periodicals, Topic: Politics
“When living constitutionalism is taken seriously, the case for the Second Amendment individual right to own and carry firearms for self-defense is very strong. In the 19th century, almost all legal commentators and courts, as well as the political branches and the public, recognized the Second Amendment as guaranteeing such a right.”
- Posted: 12/18/2009
- |
- Category: Miscellaneous
- |
- Source: ssrn.com
- Tags: Topic: Jurisprudence, Topic: Legal Periodicals
|

Latest Posts
-
www.necn.com
05/18/2012
NECN.com (AP): Democrats who control the Senate Judiciary Committee have agreed to give Gov. Chris Christie’s third nominee to the state Supreme Court a hearing, but the gay, black Republican will face difficulty being confirmed because of his lack of courtroom experience and his vow to stay out of same-sex marriage cases.
-
www.turtlebayandbeyond.org
05/18/2012
Turtle Bay and Beyond: The Secretary of Gender, Youth and Child Development in Trinidad and Tabago, Verna St Rose Greaves announced this week that she supports not only the legalization of abortion but also the promotion of gay rights.
-
www.charlotteobserver.com
05/18/2012
Charlotte Observer: Our first instinct, as opponents of North Carolina’s constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, is to challenge it any way possible and show the harm it inflicts. So we understand those who encourage the Charlotte City Council to offer same-sex benefits to its employees – even if it gets the city sued. But council members made a smarter decision last night, voting 9-2 to get an opinion from the N.C. attorney general on the issue before including the benefits in the next fiscal year budget.

|