Jen C MarsJun 30, 2023

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of a web designer who had never actually designed a website, for a man who was not LGBTQ and didn't even know his name was involved in a Supreme Court case, for a wedding that never existed, and a solicitation that was completely manufactured by a group of far right lawyers, I guess so they could make discrimination legal. A very legitimate court.

ETA link to story.

https://newrepublic.com/article/173987/mysterious-case-fake-gay-marriage-website-real-straight-man-supreme-court

The Mysterious Case of the Fake Gay Marriage Website, the Real Straight Man, and the Supreme Court

In filings in the 303 Creative v. Elenis case is a supposed request for a gay wedding website—but the man named in the request says he never filed it.

The New Republic
Show threadMichael GemarJun 30, 2023
@jencmars I really don't see how the submission of the case wouldn't be illegal, given the fraudulent claim.
Show threadMichael GemarJun 30, 2023
@jencmars Just a reminder that a judge severely sanctioned two lawyers who "innocently" cited cases made up by ChatGPT. Surely this is a far worse violation.
Show threadAlex WildJun 30, 2023
@michaelgemar @jencmars Who is going to enforce the violation? The Supreme Court itself did this. There is no recourse, no higher court.
Show threadMichael Gemar
@alexwild @jencmars Oh, I know, but I think it is vitally important to point it out. The court is no longer adjudicating cases, but just actively interpreting law whenever it likes.
Jun 30, 2023 at 2:42pmWeb
Show threadPriya ChandJun 30, 2023
@michaelgemar @alexwild @jencmars remember when Gorsuch flat-out lied to give the “praying coach”—who had since switched jobs anyway—a win? These people are bought and sold.
Show threadIpso FactoJun 30, 2023
@michaelgemar @alexwild @jencmars Legislating from the bench. Something they accused the other side of doing for decades.