LGBTQ+ Activists Made Themselves Heard For 3 Landmark Supreme Court Cases

On October 8, attorneys for three LGBTQ+ plaintiffs — Aimee Stephens, Donald Zarda, and Gerald Bostock — argued before the Supreme Court that their clients should not have been fired from their jobs for being gay or transgender. Here’s what you missed.

A Court for Thieves (A Throne for Sisters—Book Two) – Morgan Rice

Morgan Rice - A Court for Thieves (A Throne for Sisters—Book Two)  artwork

A Court for Thieves (A Throne for Sisters—Book Two)

Morgan Rice

Genre: Epic

Publish Date: October 6, 2017

Publisher: Morgan Rice

Seller: Lukeman Literary Management

“Morgan Rice's imagination is limitless. In another series that promises to be as entertaining as the previous ones, A THRONE OF SISTERS presents us with the tale of two sisters (Sophia and Kate), orphans, fighting to survive in a cruel and demanding world of an orphanage. An instant success. I can hardly wait to put my hands on the second and third books!” –Books and Movie Reviews (Roberto Mattos) From #1 Bestseller Morgan Rice comes an unforgettable new fantasy series.  In A COURT FOR THIEVES (A Throne for Sisters—Book Two), Sophia, 17, finds her world upside down as she is cast from the romantic world of aristocracy and back to the horrors of the orphanage. This time the nuns seem intent on killing her. Yet that doesn’t pain her as much as her broken heart. Will Sebastian realize his mistake and come back for her? Her younger sister Kate, 15, embarks on her training with the witch, coming of age under her auspices, mastering the sword, gaining more power than she ever imagined possible—and determined to embark on a quest to save her sister. She finds herself immersed in a world of violence and combat, of a magic she craves—and yet one that may consume her. A secret is revealed about Sophia and Kate’s lost parents, and all may not be what it seems for the sisters. Fate, indeed, may be turned on its head.  A COURT FOR THIEVES (A Throne for Sisters—Book Two) is the second book in a dazzling new fantasy series rife with love, heartbreak, tragedy, action, adventure, magic, sorcery, dragons, fate and heart-pounding suspense. A page turner, it is filled with characters that will make you fall in love, and a world you will never forget.  Book #3 in the series—A SONG FOR ORPHANS—is also now available! “[A THRONE FOR SISTERS is a] powerful opener to a series [that] will produce a combination of feisty protagonists and challenging circumstances to thoroughly involve not just young adults, but adult fantasy fans who seek epic stories fueled by powerful friendships and adversaries.” –Midwest Book Review (Diane Donovan)

iTunes Store: Top Free Books in Sci-Fi & Fantasy

Marlon Wayans Condemns CA Court Decision to Reopen Cleveland Case

Marlon Wayans is going back under a legal microscope for comparing a man to the “Family Guy” character Cleveland Brown a few years back … and he ain’t happy about it. We ran into the comedian and actor Monday at LAX, where we got his thoughts on…


TMZ Celebrity News for Celebrity Justice

Original or Copied? ‘Stairway to Heaven’ Is Back in Court

Who wrote the 1971 song’s opening passage, Jimmy Page and Robert Plant or Randy Wolfe? The music industry is hoping to get an answer on what makes a song original.
Rock Music
Chat Live!
Join Group Chat!

Tekashi 6ix9ine’s Family Scared for Their Lives and Will Be No-Shows in Court

Tekashi 6ix9ine will be testifying in front of pretty much everyone except those to whom he’s closest — his family — because we’ve learned they’re so scared of retaliation, they won’t go near the courtroom. The rapper’s immediate family members…


TMZ Celebrity News for Music

Sarah Palin’s husband seeks divorce, Alaska court filing suggests

Todd Palin, the husband of former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, appeared to file for divorce citing “incompatibility of temperament,” according to an Anchorage court docket. Chris Dignam has more.

Reuters Video: Entertainment

Find your Soulmate Live webcam chat!

Britney Spears’ New Temporary Conservator Confirmed in Court

Britney Spears now has a new temporary conservator … and, as expected, it’s Jodi Montgomery. The appointment was made official Monday in an L.A. courtroom where a judge appointed Jodi after Britney’s father, Jamie Spears, formally requested to…


TMZ Celebrity News for Celebrity Justice

Plea deal ends court fight for rapper Meek Mill

Lawrence Krasner, the attorney general for the city of Philadelphia, confirmed Tuesday that Robert Rihmeek Williams, the rapper best known as Meek Mill, pled guilty to a gun charge and will face no further penalities. Rough cut (no reporter narration).

Reuters Video: Entertainment

Find your Soulmate Live webcam chat!

Pied Piper Of R&Pee R. Kelly Will Have Hotel Visits Used Against Him In Court

R. Kelly pleads not guilty to more serious sex assault charges of underage girl years ago

Source: Chicago Tribune / Getty

As part of his ongoing federal case in New York, troubled R&B singer R. Kelly will have hotel visits used against him as evidence in the sexual abuse and sex trafficking matter. Of note, a 2015 visit to a Florida Walt Disney resort will also be entered as evidence in the trial by prosecutors.

Page Six reports:

Prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York have filed nearly a decade-worth of documents in their sex case against the “I Believe I Can Fly” singer, including flight records, birth certificates and hotel recipients — one of which is for a 2015 stay at the Walt Disney World Dolphin Hotel.

Court records submitted Thursday show that Kelly and “various individuals” stayed at the family-friendly Lake Buena Vista resort for four days, in addition to jaunts to Connecticut’s Foxwoods Resort Casino and the Planet Hollywood hotel in Los Vegas.

It’s not clear from documents if any of those “individuals” were the girls or young women he’s accused of abusing and trafficking across state lines for sex.

Prosecutors have compiled around 10 years worth of documents that reportedly show exchanges between Kelly and at least one underage girl along with potential evidence that he maintained a harem that he flew around the country for sexual favors.

Photo: Getty

The Latest Hip-Hop News, Music and Media | Hip-Hop Wired

How The Jersey Shore Cast Reacted When They Heard Mike’s Court Verdict

MTV cameras were there when ‘Jersey Shore: Family Vacation’ cast heard Mike’s court verdict — get the details.

French Court to Issue Sonia Rykiel Ruling on July 25

PARIS — A Paris commercial court weighing bids for beleaguered fashion house Sonia Rykiel will issue its ruling on July 25, WWD has learned. 
On July 1, the court will hold a closed-door hearing with various parties including the company’s works council, administrators, bidders and executives of the label, according to sources with knowledge of the matter. The famed striped knitwear label has been in receivership since April.
Two proposals have emerged as likely front-runners, with finances and a strategy aimed at keeping the label in operation, retaining some of the company’s 130 employees, these people said. One of them has a designer lined up to become creative director. 
Former Balmain chief executive officer Emmanuel Diemoz is leading one of these bids, while the other involves a wealthy French family with industrial holdings in other sectors, but no experience in the fashion business, according to the sources. Diemoz did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The executive is credited for playing a key part in the revival of Balmain, building brand heat with a younger audience through showy designs from Olivier Rousteing and a strong social media presence.
The family bidders have enlisted help from an industry expert, and a younger family

Follow WWD on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook.

Read More…

Rapper Cardi B appears in court, her lawyers confident of ‘positive outcome’

The musician is felony assault charges relating to an alleged fight at a New York City strip club. Rough cut (no reporter narration)

Reuters Video: Entertainment

Find your Soulmate Live webcam chat!

Cardi B Back in Court to Plead Not Guilty to New Strip Club Assault Charges

[[tmz:video id=”0_inxdsm76″]] 1:08 PM PT — Cardi has officially left the building … with plenty of love from her fans. [[tmz:video id=”0_yo90fqro”]] Cardi B is entering her plea on all the new charges in the strip club beatdown case. Fresh of her…


TMZ Celebrity News for Celebrity Justice

Lil Wayne — Hit Again With Court Judgment … Stop the Bleeding!!!

Lil Wanye is getting pummeled by court judgments … the latest by a pyrotechnics company that wants a pound of the rapper’s flesh. It seems Wayne got a bunch of fireworks from Pyrotek Special Effects for his 2013 tour, including 200 tracer comets, 92…


TMZ Celebrity News for Music

Hope Solo — Domestic Violence Case Back On … Court Overturns Dismissal

She thought she was off the hook … but Hope Solo’s domestic violence case (which was previously dismissed) is now BACK ON … which means she WILL face charges in municipal court.  As we previously reported, Solo was accused of beating up her…


TMZ Celebrity News for Celebrity Justice

Jon Jones — Dana White Attends Court Hearing … Supporting Ex-Champ (PHOTO)

Ex-UFC champ Jon Jones has some serious support inside a New Mexico courtroom this morning — UFC honcho Dana White … who’s waiting for Jones to be arraigned stemming from an alleged hit-and-run crash in April. As we previously reported, Jones…


TMZ Celebrity News for Celebrity Justice

Jaden Smith’s Girlfriend Wears A Shirt With Her Mugshot On It After Court Date

Here’s what we know about Jaden Smith’s new girlfriend — the one he was seen packing on the PDA with at New York Fashion Week. 

Here name is Sarah Snyder, she’s 19 and she was arrested and charged with felony Grand Larceny for allegedly stealing a $ 16,000 Hermes Birkin handbag from a store in Bedford, New York, this past February.

Snyder appeared in court on Wednesday and her lawyer told “Entertainment Tonight” she would not be accepting any offers or pleas from the district attorney.

“The only thing we are interested in is an exoneration and an apology,” her lawyer Robert Schuster said. 

Meanwhile, Snyder made it pretty clear just how seriously she is taking the charges when she posted an Instagram photo wearing a T-shirt with her mugshot on it. 

56 nights

A photo posted by @sarahfuckingsnyder on


Also on HuffPost: 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Style – The Huffington Post
FASHION NEWS UPDATE-Visit Shoe Deals Online today for the hottest deals online for shoes!

Gilbert Arenas — I Busted My Ex Blabbing About Me … See Ya in Court, Laura Govan!

Gilbert Arenas caught Laura Govan red-handed leaking their email exchange to a blogger — and now he’s calling her out in front of a judge … according to court docs.


TMZ Celebrity News for Celebrity Justice

Cop From Village People to E! — You Can Hang Out with All the Boys … In Court

Young man … Village People are pissed.  I said, young man … Victor feels really dissed I said young man, E! has taken our song And they did us so ve-ry wrong Boom boom boom boom boom It’s fun to send them a cease and desist It’s fun to send…


TMZ Celebrity News for Fashion

Insane Clown Posse’s Lawsuit Against the FBI Revived By Court

The Juggalos get another day in court.
A federal appeals court has reversed a lower court’s ruling, reviving a lawsuit filed on behalf of the Insane… Music News

Hot entertainment tips and specials!
Download FREE Music for your iPod® or any MP3 player!

Need those hard to get tickets?
Call Now: 877-516-9953

Kim Davis Asks Appeals Court To Let Her Refuse To Issue Marriage Licenses

MOREHEAD, Ky., Sept 12 (Reuters) – The county clerk from Kentucky who was jailed after refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples has asked an appeals court to let her continue her stand until a lawsuit against her is decided.

Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, due back at work Monday after six days behind bars, has said her beliefs as an Apostolic Christian prevent her from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples and her attorneys have said the 49-year-old woman will not violate her conscience when she returns to work.

In her absence, deputy clerks have been issuing licenses and have said they would continue to do so.

Davis was jailed when she refused to comply with U.S. District Judge David Bunning’s order to issue licenses. He ordered her released when the deputy clerks began issuing the licenses.

In a Friday motion filed with the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, Davis’ attorneys asked that she be allowed to continue banning marriage licenses for her entire office until the case is settled.

Davis’ attorneys argued that Bunning’s initial order had only covered couples who were suing her. They said he violated her right to due process during her appeal when he expanded his initial injunction to include any couple legally eligible to marry, the filing says.

She should thus be allowed to continue her ban now that the couples covered under the first order have been issued licenses, the attorneys argue.

In a separate filing on Friday, her attorneys said “this case would be over” if the governor, using the same authority that allowed him to change the certificates to be gender neutral, would simply remove her name from the documents.

Bunning warned Davis in his release order that there would be consequences if she interfered with the issuance of marriage licenses when she returned to work. A deputy clerk has said he will continue to issue licenses.

On Tuesday, Davis walked out of the Carter County Detention Center to a roaring crowd. Her supporters continued protests last week after her release, demanding the firing of any deputy clerks who provide marriage licenses without Davis’s permission.

Her attorneys have said marriage certificates issued without her authority have been void.

The issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples in Kentucky and other states has become the latest focal point in the long-running debate over gay marriage that has continued even after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June allowed the practice nationwide.

Also on HuffPost:

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Gay Voices – The Huffington Post gay - First Date 300x250

Following Suit: Tom Brady Shows How to Dress for Court

If you happen to be facing a Federal Judge, here are some lawyers’ tips for looking clean, confident, and respectful. Style

Can Jenelle And Barbara Resolve Their ‘Teen Mom 2′ Custody Issues Outside Of Court?

Can Jenelle and Barbara settle their “Teen Mom 2” custody issues outside of court?

Federal court sides with Aretha

Aretha Franklin was granted an emergency injunction which bars Amazing Grace, a documentary with footage of her, to be screened at the Telluride Film Festival this weekend. RSS feed
The Best Concert Tickets in the Nation! $ 8 off any Event Ticket, Use Code: FALL8OFF at checkout with $ 40 minimum purchase. Find Tickets Now!

A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court – Mark Twain

Mark Twain - A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court  artwork

A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court

Mark Twain

Genre: Fantasy

Publish Date: January 1, 1911

Publisher: Public Domain

Seller: Public Domain

The tale begins when the "yankee," a skilled mechanic in a 19th century New England arms factory, is struck on the head during a quarrel, and awakens to find himself being taken as a prisoner to the Camelot of 528 A. D. With his 19th century know-how, the "yankee" sets out to modernize the Kingdom, but is opposed by a jealous court magician. Clever enough, but buried beneath Twain's humor is a serious social satire.

iTunes Store: Top Free Books in Sci-Fi & Fantasy

U.S. Open Tennis Star Ana Ivanovic’s Beauty Secrets (On and Off the Court)

Serbian tennis star Ana Ivanovic is serious about sun protection—and with good reason. Because her job takes her outdoors for long stretches, keeping her skin safe is incredibly important to her. So it makes sense…

Subscribe to All
FASHION NEWS UPDATE-Visit 2 Spendless Online today for the hottest deals online!

Kentucky Clerk Who Refuses To Issue Gay Marriage Licenses Begs Supreme Court For Help

After defying multiple orders to issue marriage licenses to gays and lesbians, a Kentucky clerk is taking her case to the Supreme Court.

Rowan County clerk Kim Davis on Friday filed an emergency request with the court to put a temporary hold on a lower-court ruling that effectively forces her to begin serving gay couples, saying that complying with the order would violate her religious beliefs. 

According to Davis’ petition, her “conscience forbids her from approving” marriage licenses to gay couples “because the prescribed form mandates that she authorize the proposed union and issue a license bearing her own name and imprimatur.”

“She holds an undisputed sincerely-held religious belief that marriage is a union between a man and a woman, only,” the petition continues. “Thus, in her belief, [same-sex marriage] is not, in fact, marriage.”

Equality Case Files, a nonprofit that tracks litigation around same-sex marriage, posted a copy of Davis’ filing on its website. The filing can be read in full here.

Davis’ request was addressed to Justice Elena Kagan, who oversees emergency petitions from Kentucky. Justices from time to time are asked to review such petitions, which are only procedural in scope and are meant to delay implementation of lower-court rulings. Kagan could either act on Davis’ petition on her own or refer it to the full court for adjudication.

The Supreme Court ruled in June that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. Following the landmark ruling, Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear — who was one of the defendants in that case — ordered state clerks to begin issuing marriage licenses to gay and heterosexual couples alike. 

But Davis refused. And then refused again after she was sued and was ordered by a federal court to comply. On Wednesday, an appellate court told her that she had “little or no likelihood” of winning her case.

In her Friday petition to Kagan, Davis argues that adding her “name, authorization, and approval” to marriages by gay couples would amount to a “searing act of validation” that “would forever echo in her conscience.”

The petition goes on: “If Davis’ religious objection cannot be accommodated when Kentucky marriage licenses are available in more than 130 marriage licensing locations … then elected officials have no real religious freedom when they take public office.”

That’s the crux of Davis’ legal argument, but any Supreme Court action in response would be much narrower in scope. Rather than opining on whether Davis’ religious freedom is being violated, a ruling from Kagan or from the full court would be limited to deciding whether to halt the original court order requiring Davis to issue marriage licenses to all couples. 

According to BuzzFeed’s Chris Geidner, that court order is set to go into effect on Monday. 

David Ermold and his partner have been turned away by Davis’ office twice. Ermold told The Associated Press that all the back-and-forth is “getting tedious.”

“We get torn down, built back up, torn down, built back up,” he said. “It’s emotionally draining.” 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Gay Voices – The Huffington Post gay - First Date 300x250

Roman Polanski: Polish Court Sets Extradition Hearing Date

U.S. legal documents requested by the court last May finally arrived after the extension of a deadline for receipt of the paperwork.

read more

Hollywood Reporter

Roman Polanski: Polish Court Sets Extradition Hearing Date

U.S. legal documents requested by the court last May finally arrived after the extension of a deadline for receipt of the paperwork.

read more


deadmau5: Live At Earl’s Court – deadmau5

deadmau5 - deadmau5: Live At Earl's Court  artwork

deadmau5: Live At Earl’s Court


Genre: Concert Films

Price: $ 12.99

Release Date: August 2, 2011

© © 2010 EMI under exclusive license to Ultra Records

iTunes Store: Top Movies in Concert Films

Woman Suing 2 Chainz For $5 Million To Represent Herself In Court

Christine Chisholm, the woman who is suing 2 Chainz for $ 5 million, will represent herself in court. Chisholm claims that she lost her job as a manager at a barbershop after a video of her in which Chainz calls her a “thot” went viral. “I feel like if I’m just honest with everything that really happened then there’s no reason why I wouldn’t win,” Chisholm said.
RTT – Music
Webcam Performers Wanted – Earn $ 100,000 per year!

Models Wanted
Promo Live Chat

Pakistani Court Bans Bollywood Title ‘Phantom’

The upcoming release is set in the aftermath of the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks which India alleged were planned by Pakistan.

read more


Roman Polanski Extradition Case: Polish Court Extends Deadline for U.S. Documents

The Oscar-winning director’s lawyers say the legal papers are key to his defense as a U.S. paper urges the Attorney General to “get on the case.”

read more


Terrence Howard — What Lucious Would Do in My Court Case (VIDEO)

Terrence Howard can’t talk about Friday’s testimony — that his make-out scene with Jennifer Hudson triggered an insane reaction from then-wife Michelle Ghent — but he was quick to tell us how Lucious Lyon would handle the…


TMZ Celebrity News for Stars In Heat

Courtney Love, Frances Bean Cobain Urge Court Not To Release Kurt’s Death Photos

Kurt Cobain‘s family, Courtney Love and Frances Bean Cobain, are urging a Seattle judge to not authorize the release of his death photos. Seattle Superior Court judge Theresa Doyle will hear arguments from both Love and daughter Frances Bean, as well as from Richard Lee, who runs a local public access television show.
RTT – Music
Webcam Performers Wanted – Earn $ 100,000 per year!

Models Wanted
Promo Live Chat

Chad Johnson — MIA from Court … Wanted by Cops (UPDATE)

8:50 AM PT — Chad’s on it. He says he’s dispatched his lawyer to pay the $ 2k bond, so he doesn’t get locked up. Chad Johnson pissed off a judge in South Florida, and now there’s a warrant out for his arrest … TMZ Sports has learned. The warrant…


TMZ Celebrity News for Celebrity Justice

Americans Are Still Divided Over Gay Marriage After Supreme Court Decision

NEW YORK (AP) — The Supreme Court’s ruling last month legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide has left Americans sharply divided, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll that suggests support for gay unions may be down slightly from earlier this year.

The poll also found a near-even split over whether local officials with religious objections should be required to issuemarriage licenses to same-sex couples, with 47 percent saying that should be the case and 49 percent say they should be exempt.



Overall, if there’s a conflict, a majority of those questioned think religious liberties should win out over gay rights, according to the poll. While 39 percent said it’s more important for the government to protect gay rights, 56 percent said protection of religious liberties should take precedence.

The poll was conducted July 9 to July 13, less than three weeks after the Supreme Court ruled states cannot ban same-sex marriage.

According to the poll, 42 percent support same-sex marriage and 40 percent oppose it. The percentage saying they favor legal same-sex marriage in their state was down slightly from the 48 percent who said so in an April poll. In January, 44 percent were in favor.



Asked specifically about the Supreme Court ruling, 39 percent said they approve and 41 percent said they disapprove.

“What the Supreme Court did is jeopardize our religious freedoms,” said Michael Boehm, 61, an industrial controls engineer from the Detroit area who describes himself as a conservative-leaning independent.

“You’re going to see a conflict between civil law and people who want to live their lives according to their faiths,” Boehm said.

Boehm was among 59 percent of the poll respondents who said wedding-related businesses with religious objections should be allowed to refuse service to gay and lesbian couples. That compares with 52 percent in April.

Also, 46 percent said businesses more generally should be allowed to refuse service to same-sex couples, while 51 percent said that should not be allowed.

Claudette Girouard, 69, a retiree from Chesterfield Township, Michigan, said she is a moderate independent voter who has gradually become supportive of letting same-sex couples marry.

“I don’t see what the big hoopla is,” she said. “If they’re happy, why not?”

Girouard said local officials should be required to perform same-sex marriages, but does not think that wedding-related businesses should be forced to serve same-sex couples.

“If the official doesn’t like what he’s being asked to do, then quit,” she said. “But businesses are kind of independent, so if they have a strong belief against it, there are enough other businesses out there for someone to use.”




The poll found pronounced differences in viewpoints depending on political affiliation.

For example, 65 percent of Democrats, but only 22 percent of Republicans favored allowing same-sex couples to legally marry in their state. And 72 percent of Republicans but just 31 percent of Democrats said local officials with religious objections should be exempt from issuing marriage licenses.

By a 64-32 margin, most Democrats said it’s more important to protect gay rights than religious liberties when the two are in conflict. Republicans said the opposite, by 82-17.

Clarence Wells, 60, a conservative from Rockwood, Tennessee, said he strongly disapproved of the Supreme Court’s ruling. He anticipates friction as gay couples try to exercise their newfound rights and people with religious objections to same-sex marriage balk at accepting them.

“I don’t believe it’s going to go over smoothly,” said Wells. “I think a lot of them will be shunned in church. … I think there will businesses that are going to close, because some people are stubborn enough to not want to deal with it.”

Andrew Chan, 41, a moderate independent from Seattle, said he has tried to remain neutral on same-sex marriage.

“For me, it’s always been about tolerating,” said Chan, who works for a nonprofit organization. “I’ve got friends on both sides.”

Chan said he was happy for gays and lesbians who have found someone they want to marry, and he expressed some wariness toward politicians who might try to roll back the Supreme Court ruling.

“That just creates more division,” he said. “Are we looking to move the country forward or move it backward?”


The AP-GfK Poll of 1,004 adults was conducted online July 9 to July 13, using a sample drawn from GfK’s probability-based KnowledgePanel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 3.4 percentage points. Some questions were ask of half samples of respondents and have smaller margins of error. Respondents were first selected randomly using phone or mail survey methods, and later interviewed online. People selected for KnowledgePanel who didn’t otherwise have access to the Internet were provided access at no cost to them.


Swanson reported from Washington.



— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Gay Voices – The Huffington Post gay - First Date 300x250

NFL in Court to Stop U.S. Super Bowl Ads on Canadian TV

The pro league urges an appeals court to strike down a ban from 2017 on local commercials replacing American spots during the championship game telecast.

read more


Luke Wilson — Bitch Betta Have My Money! Beats Ex-Assistant in Court

Luke Wilson’s ex-assistant tried to act like he forgot, but the actor just scored a huge sum of money from the guy. Like brrap brrap brrap … A judge awarded Wilson $ 438k from Charles Lodi — the former employee he sued for using his credit cards to…


TMZ Celebrity News for Celebrity Justice

What Was It Like to Be at the Supreme Court When the Marriage Equality Judgement Was Announced?

What was it like at the Supreme Court when the marriage equality judgment was announced?: originally appeared on Quora: The best answer to any question. Ask a question, get a great answer. Learn from experts and access insider knowledge. You can follow Quora on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+.

Answer by Stephanie Vardavas

I arrived at the Supreme Court building at about 9:25 and waded directly into the crowd. It was a big crowd. We're talking hundreds and hundreds of people. The mood was very festive. Many people had brought their kids and even their little dogs. People were reasonably confident of a positive decision but still a little wary. Everyone was friendly and animated. People were handing out little flags from the Human Rights Campaign and the ACLU, "Proud to be a Democrat" stickers, signs that read "America is Ready," and rainbow buttons with President Obama on them. Chatted with the woman next to me, who had brought her teenaged daughter. She said she was from “the reddest, most horrible part of Michigan, but I hope soon that won’t matter anymore.”

There was a lot of jovial speculation about what Justice Scalia's dissent might be like.

MSNBC estimated at least a 10:1 ratio between supporters and opponents of same sex marriage in the crowd. I would peg it at more like 20:1 or even 25:1 or 30:1. There was one guy in a black t-shirt covered with Biblical references to Sodom and Gomorrah. The vast majority of the crowd were gay rights supporters who were there in the hope of seeing justice done. Several of them were Christians with colorful signs proclaiming their support for marriage equality.

In addition to the two above I saw other people with signs that said things like "I'm an Evangelical for Marriage Equality."

There was a guy with a giant homemade sign collage proclaiming that the wages of sin are death, and that HIV/AIDS are God's wrath. There were a few other "Christian" demonstrators but they disappeared relatively quickly after the decision came out.

A minute or two after 10 am we saw "the running of the interns" carrying copies of the decision and dissents to the various TV reporters waiting at their setups on the sidewalk. At about this time somebody who had been able to load SCOTUSblog on his phone started shouting, "We won! 5 to 4!" Everyone started cheering and hugging.

I was standing next to about 20 guys in identical blue t-shirts, who turned out to be the DC Gay Men's Chorus, and just a minute or two later they began to sing the national anthem. Everyone around me joined in. We were all singing the national anthem and by the end of it I was crying like a baby. I am almost 59 years old and in my whole life I have never been prouder to be an American.

Gay Men's Chorus of Washington

They followed it up with a wonderful song called "Make Them Hear You," about fighting for justice. I cried some more.

I started wandering around, listening to snippets of the various standup reports being done by the TV news people, taking pictures for groups of people who wanted to get pictures with the Supreme Court building in the background. I was interviewed by a reporter and cameraperson from ThinkProgress and while I haven't seen the video I believe I was reasonably coherent, although I'm sure my eyes were still full. I'll post it here if I ever find it online.

The Gay Men's Chorus started singing again. They repeated the national anthem and "Make Them Hear You," then added "The Impossible Dream," which was incredibly moving, and then they sang some modified lyrics to "We Shall Overcome." "We shall marry free / we shall marry free / we shall marry free today…"

I never got close enough to hear any of the remarks by the plaintiffs, their counsel, or the lawyers representing the other side. But we had set our TiVo to record MSNBC from 10 am till noon, and I was able to watch that after I got back.

This decision was exceptionally meaningful for me because my old friend Evan Wolfson is the godfather of the marriage equality movement. He is the founder and president of Freedom to Marry, and spoke today on MSNBC about his plan to unwind the organization now that it has achieved its objective.  We've been friends for almost 40 years and I'm so proud of him that I could burst.

Stephanie Vardavas' answer to Who is your favorite LGBT person and why?

tl;dr It was amazing.

More questions on Quora:

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Gay Voices – The Huffington Post gay - First Date 300x250

José Andrés Will Curate Food Court at Landmark Music Festival

José Andrés Will Curate Food Court at Landmark Music FestivalHe's taking suggestions from the public.

Music News Headlines – Yahoo News

The Game — From Champagne Frenzy to Court in 5 Hours (VIDEO)

The Game was dropping tens of thousands of dollars on champagne at 3 AM Monday, and appearing as a defendant in court 5 hours later … and the judge could never tell.  Game pled not guilty to felony criminal…


TMZ Celebrity News for Music

News in Photos: Supreme Court Legalizes Gay Marriage After Landmark 193,000,000-115,000,000 Decision

The Onion

News in Brief: Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Most Buck-Wild Pride Parade Nation’s Ever Seen

WASHINGTON—Following decades of debate over the constitutional right to same-sex marriage, the U.S. Supreme Court today handed down a 5-4 ruling in favor of the most buck-wild, balls-to-the-wall gay pride parade this country has ever seen. “After reviewing the constitutional underpinnings of this case, the court finds that it is discriminatory for states to deny the right to the most out-of-control, bonkers gay pride parade that anyone could possibly imagine,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion, which outlined at length the elaborate floats, billowing rainbow flags, and phalanxes of outlandishly dressed participants, barely scratching the surface of how completely bananas things are about to get. “This decision confirms what should be obvious: The government cannot prevent a nonstop bacchanal surging through the streets of every American city. We’re talking half-naked lesbians covered in body paint, rollerblading homosexuals in brightly colored Native American headdresses and …

The Onion

Andre Iguodala Talks Tech on and off the Court

NBA Finals MVP small forward Andre Iguodala visited WIRED to talk with Mark McClusky, Head of Operations, about the tech, including a card game app, that helped the Golden State Warriors win the 2015 championship.
WIRED Videos – The Scene

Liberals Just Had An Amazing Week At The Supreme Court

WASHINGTON — The conservative Roberts Supreme Court just gave American liberals the most joyous judicial week they could have asked for.

In a span of just two days, the rightward-leaning court all but settled Obamacare as the law of the land; reaffirmed key components of housing discrimination law meant to protect minorities; and granted gay Americans the right to get married in any state they wish.

Even Texas.

The string of progressive victories left officials hugging and high-fiving at the White House, gay couples crying tears of joy on the courthouse steps, and hardline conservatives wondering on Twitter whether their erstwhile judicial heroes were now traitors.

To recap:

In King v. Burwell, decided Thursday, the court ruled 6-3 to reject a lawsuit brought by conservatives that would have stripped Obamacare subsidies from people who purchased their health coverage on the federal exchanges. A ruling in the plaintiffs’ favor threatened to unravel the system created by the Affordable Care Act, potentially causing millions to lose their health care coverage and wreaking havoc on state insurance markets.

The ruling marked the second time in three years the court had rejected an existential threat to Obamacare. As in the previous case, 2012’s NFIB v. Sebelius, Chief Justice John Roberts joined the liberal wing of the court, this time along with Justice Anthony Kennedy, to keep the president’s signature law intact. Justice Antonin Scalia, writing in a typically scathing dissent, lambasted the majority’s reasoning as “interpretive jiggery-pokery” and “pure applesauce.”

In Texas Dept. of Housing v. Inclusive Communities, also decided Thursday, the court handed a victory to civil rights groups with a 5-4 decision that upheld so-called disparate impact claims. Joined by Kennedy, who often plays the swing vote, the liberal justices ruled that someone suing under fair housing law doesn’t need to prove that a developer or the government knowingly discriminated — only that the policy had a disparate impact, something that can often be demonstrated with statistics.

Had the conservative wing prevailed, plaintiffs bringing claims would have had the far more difficult task of proving intentional discrimination, which typically isn’t documented by those who practice it. Civil rights groups so feared an unfavorable ruling in such a case that the Obama administration sought to keep the question of disparate impact away from the Roberts court.

Finally, in Obergefell v. Hodges, issued Friday, the justices ruled 5-4 to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide, marking a triumph for the gay rights movement decades in the making. The liberal justices, who were joined again by Kennedy, determined that the Constitution grants anyone, regardless of their sexual orientation, the right to marry, effectively invalidating the bans against same-sex unions that still exist in 13 states. “No longer may this liberty be denied,” Kennedy wrote in his highly quotable decision for the majority.

Scalia penned another memorably incredulous dissent, opening by saying he chose to write separately from Roberts in order to “call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy.” Insisting his concern was not the merit or lack thereof of gay marriage, he wrote that the majority’s “pretentious” and “egotistic” opinion lacked “even a thin veneer of law” and was chock full of “mummeries and straining-to-be-memorable passages.” “[W]hat really astounds is the hubris reflected in today’s judicial Putsch,” he seethed.

The good news for liberals wasn’t confined to just the high-profile cases. In Friday’s Johnson v. United States decision, which was overshadowed by the Obergefell case, the court ruled 8-1 that a section of the Armed Career Criminal Act, which is used to extend prison sentences, is “unconstitutionally vague.” The ruling may compel Congress to address the language of the law as thousands of prisoners seek to have their sentences reduced.

The majority opinion in the Johnson case was written by Scalia, giving progressive court watchers another reason to celebrate. As ThinkProgress’s Ian Millhiser explains, the Johnson opinion makes Scalia one of just two justices who’ve penned as many as eight majority opinions this term. If tradition is any indication, then Scalia probably won’t be writing another majority opinion before the court breaks, likely leaving the duty to one of his less conservative colleagues.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Gay Voices – The Huffington Post gay - First Date 300x250

Ted Cruz Wants To Be Able To Vote Out Supreme Court Justices

After calling the last day “some of the darkest 24 hours in our nation’s history,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) is now calling for Supreme Court justices to face elections.

In a National Review op-ed published Friday, Cruz chastised the high court for its decisions to reject a major challenge to Obamacare and to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide.

“Both decisions were judicial activism, plain and simple,” Cruz writes. “Both were lawless.”

To challenge that “judicial activism,” Cruz said he is proposing a constitutional amendment to require Supreme Court justices to face retention elections every eight years.

“The decisions that have deformed our constitutional order and have debased our culture are but symptoms of the disease of liberal judicial activism that has infected our judiciary,” Cruz writes. “A remedy is needed that will restore health to the sick man in our constitutional system. Rendering the justices directly accountable to the people would provide such a remedy.”

Under Cruz’s proposed amendment, justices would have to be approved by a majority of American voters as well as by the majority of voters in least half of the states. If they failed to reach the required approval rating, they would be removed from office and barred from serving on the Supreme Court in the future.

Cruz, who is running for president in 2016, was among many Republican candidates criticizing the justices after a strong week for liberals at the court.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R), who is expected to jump in the presidential race soon, also offered up a proposed constitutional fix to combat the Supreme Court’s marriage equality decision. In a statement, Walker argued for an amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman — a proposal Cruz has also floated.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Gay Voices – The Huffington Post gay - First Date 300x250

White House Goes Rainbow After Gay Marriage Supreme Court Decision

The White House was lit up in the colors of the rainbow on Friday night to celebrate the Supreme Court’s historic ruling that made same-sex marriage legal across all 50 states.

“Tonight, the White House was lit to demonstrate our unwavering commitment to progress and equality, here in America and around the world,” the White House said in a statement. “The pride colors reflect the diversity of the LGBT community, and tonight, these colors celebrate a new chapter in the history of American civil rights.”

wh rainbow

White House lit with rainbow colors on Friday, June 26, 2015. (Photo: Igor Bobic, The Huffington Post

Hundreds gathered outside the fences to view the colors and celebrate the ruling, according to HuffPost’s Igor Bobic.

A bold decorating choice, but sometimes, you just gotta go with your heart. And it matched the mood around the nation, and the double rainbow that appeared over the White House not long after the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Tonight. #lovewins

A photo posted by Pete Souza (@petesouza) on

DSLR version.

A photo posted by Pete Souza (@petesouza) on

Another iPhone version from tonight. #lovewins

A photo posted by Pete Souza (@petesouza) on

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Gay Voices – The Huffington Post gay - First Date 300x250

Bill Cosby Fights to Maintain Confidentiality of “Embarrassing” Court Records

An obscure rule allows the unsealing of court records after two years, but the comedian’s lawyer is opposing the release of materials that “would generate a firestorm of publicity.”

read more

Hollywood Reporter

Waiting for the Court – But Not for History

Seem a bit familiar? Here we are again, waiting for the Supreme Court to rule. It’s become something of a Pride month tradition, a bit like parades and rainbow flags and motorcycles roaring up San Francisco’s Market Street.

Yes, we’ve been here before . . .
Twenty-nine years ago, in June of 1986, we found ourselves at this place, reading tea leaves, weighing odds, and then seeing that wait end in the nightmare decision that was Bowers v. Hardwick – rather crassly announced the day after Pride.

Ten years later, we were back to argue against Colorado’s dreadful Amendment 2 – and this time, after seven months of waiting, we won (6-3 no less!). Then in the June just 17 years after the hated Bowers – an eternity in denying human rights, but a judicial nanosecond – we waited again, dissecting the oral arguments, speculating and analyzing and daring to hope for what, just in time for Pride, actually came to pass: the monumental victory in Lawrence v. Texas and the end of anti-sodomy laws in the United States.

And we can all remember two years ago, waiting for what came down, to our joy, when Windsor gutted the Defense of Marriage Act. Now, today, within less than two weeks, we’ll know the outcome of Obergefell v. Hodges, and whether we will – at long last – have the right to marry from coast to coast.

Of course, we’ve never just waited – for anything
It doesn’t really do us justice to say that we waited. Yes, we waited, often anxiously, in the weeks and days and hours before these rulings. But the LGBT movement has never called a time out to sit patiently until someone else hands us our rights. We’ve fought for them. For more than half a century. Thousands of protests and marches, thousands of lawsuits, thousands of lobby visits, thousands of acts of courage and resistance and defiance, acts both large and small, have paved the way for every single last step forward.

After all, the first Pride parades marked perhaps the quintessential moment when LGBT people rose up to claim our full rights as citizens and our full dignity as human beings – the Stonewall Riots.

The real meaning of Pride
The joy of Pride – the pride of Pride – of course isn’t really about whether the Supreme Court rules in our favor. It’s not really about what anybody else has to say or how they feel toward us. The Court’s decisions matter immensely. But they don’t determine Pride.

We determine what Pride is, what Pride means. Pride lives in our families, our communities, the arts and cultures we’ve created. Pride lives in our history, in the record of dumbfounding challenges and stupefying odds that we’ve come so far toward overcoming. Pride lives in all the dizzying, dazzling ways that we march in Pride parades; all the ways that we love; all the ways that we fly our own rainbow flags.

Pride is ultimately what we make it – always has been and always will be. We all hope that 2015’s Pride will bring another great legal triumph. But in the end, Pride has, does, and will matter even more.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Gay Voices – The Huffington Post gay - First Date 300x250

Led Zeppelin at Earls Court book

With their new book covering Led Zeppelin’s five nights at Earls Court about to ship, Rufus Stone Limited Editions have released RSS feed
The Best Concert Tickets in the Nation! $ 8 off any Event Ticket, Use Code: FALL8OFF at checkout with $ 40 minimum purchase. Find Tickets Now!

News in Brief: Struggling Justice Alito Sent Down To Lower Federal Court

WASHINGTON—Following weeks of declining performance within the nation’s highest judicial body, the Supreme Court announced Thursday that it has sent a struggling Associate Justice Samuel Alito down to a lower federal court. “Sammy’s been a little cold with his dissenting opinions lately, so we’ve assigned him to a minor appellate jurisdiction until he can better contribute to this court,” Chief Justice John Roberts told reporters, confirming that Alito had been removed from the Supreme Court’s nine-person roster and appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. “Obviously, Sammy is a veteran legal scholar who has played a deciding role in several high-profile cases, but until he regains his stroke, we need to go with someone who can best interpret statutory law as set out by the U.S. Constitution. But we’re confident that he only needs to author a few …

The Onion

Mel Gibson, Oksana Grigorieva in New Court Battle Over Lucia

11:30 PST:  We’ve learned Mel walked out of court victorious. The judge is allowing Mel to take Lucia to Australia for 1 month and keep her in L.A. an additional 2 weeks before he leaves the country.   We’re also told there was a dispute over…


TMZ Celebrity News for Celebrity Justice

Court Decision Will Close All But 7 Abortion Clinics in Texas

Over the next 22 days, the number of facilities where women in Texas will be able to have legal abortions and/or be prescribed the medical abortion pill mifepristone will dramatically decrease—from the more than 40…

Subscribe to All
FASHION NEWS UPDATE-Visit 2 Spendless Online today for the hottest deals online!

Hirsch Back In Court

Actor Emile Hirsch appeared in a Utah court Monday as attorneys settled on a date for prosecutors to lay out the evidence that led them to charge him with assault in a nightclub incident during the…

Access Hollywood Latest News

Ex Voice of ‘Charlie Brown’ — Goes Berserk in Court … I Hope You Drop Dead, Judge!!

Get ready to hear Charlie Brown curse like a sailor, and wish death on a judge — the former voice of the cartoon character went absolutely NUTS during a San Diego court hearing. Peter Robbins was going to be sentenced for…


TMZ Celebrity News for Celebrity Justice

Giorgio Armani to Fund Tennis Court Cover in Milan

Giorgio Armani has further cemented his long-standing partnership with Fondo Ambiente Italiano (FAI), the Italian National Trust, by financing the construction of a glass and iron structure to cover the Villa Necchi Campiglio’s tennis court in Milan.
Armani is among the main sponsors of the restoration of the villa, which became a public museum in 2008.
“I was immediately impressed by Villa Necchi Campiglio’s artistic and cultural richness: The building reflects a sophisticated and social, yet intimately Milanese lifestyle,” said Armani, who is a member of the board of Friends of FAI, the association that promotes trust’s projects in the U.S. “This is why I enthusiastically decided to give an additional contribution to the restoration and preservation of the villa’s tennis court. Many years have passed since my first meeting with the FAI and we still share projects and a passion to preserve the wonderful works of human brilliance.”
Armani first collaborated with the FAI in 1983, financing part of the restoration of the Abbey of San Fruttuoso in Camogli, a seaside village in Italy’s Liguria region.

Follow WWD on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook.

Read More…
WWD » Discovery’s Shark Week Teams Up with Bad Aby Ltd

Supreme Court Overturns Man’s Conviction for Facebook ‘Threats’

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a big decision that overturns the conviction of Anthony Elonis for making threats on Facebook against… Music News

Hot entertainment tips and specials!
Download FREE Music for your iPod® or any MP3 player!

Need those hard to get tickets?
Call Now: 877-516-9953

Rick Santorum Will Fight The Supreme Court If It Legalizes Gay Marriage

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum said on Sunday that if the Supreme Court legalizes gay marriage later this year, he would dispute the decision, saying that the court “doesn’t have the final word.”

“Of course I’d fight it,” he said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “Roe versus Wade was decided 30 some years ago, and I continue to fight that, because I think the court got it wrong. And I think if the court decides this case in error, I will continue to fight, as we have on the issue of life … We’re not bound by what nine people say in perpetuity.”

Santorum justified his stance by arguing that the executive and legislative branches are obligated to challenge the judicial branch.

“I think it’s important to understand that the Supreme Court doesn’t have the final word. It has its word. Its word has validity. But it’s important for Congress and the president, frankly, to push back when the Supreme Court gets it wrong,” he said.

The Supreme Court last month heard oral arguments on Obergefell v. Hodges, a case involving whether or not state bans on marriage equality are constitutional. It is likely that the court will rule in favor of marriage equality when the decision is announced sometime in June. Since its landmark decisions overturning the Defense of Marriage Act and California’s Proposition 8 in 2013, the court has refused to hear a number of appeals on state marriage equality bans, and in oral arguments, justices cited the growing public opinion in favor of gay marriage.

But among the GOP presidential field, several candidates have contended that state legislatures, not courts, should decide on whether or not to accept gay marriage. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) even introduced a constitutional amendment protecting states that define marriage as between a man and a woman.

As a social conservative, Santorum has long been a stalwart opponent of marriage equality. He has also said that he would not attend a gay wedding, even if it involved a close family member or friend.

“I just felt like as a person of my faith, that would be something that would be a violation of my faith. I would love them and support them, but I would not participate in that ceremony,” he said.

Watch Santorum’s interview in the video.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Gay Voices – The Huffington Post gay - First Date 300x250

Joe Budden Wanted By Police After Skipping Court Date

Joe Budden is a no show at a recent court date involving a 2014 domestic violence case.

HipHopDX News

Joe Budden — Blows Off Court … Wanted by Cops

Rapper Joe Budden is so on top of his social media game … he flat out forgot to show up to face charges that he allegedly attacked his gf — which is why there’s now a warrant for his arrest. No joke … Budden went A.W.O.L. for Thursday’s…


TMZ Celebrity News for Celebrity Justice

Jesse Tyler Fergusuon’s Genius Plan to Get the Supreme Court to Legalize Gay Marriage

The U.S. Supreme Court will likely rule next month on a case that could determine whether same-sex marriage is a constitutional right. In an effort to sway the nation’s top justices, Jesse Tyler Fergusuon has…

Subscribe to All
FASHION NEWS UPDATE-Visit 2 Spendless Online today for the hottest deals online!

Bobby Flay Cheated With January Jones, Claims Estranged Wife In Court Docs

Bobby Flay and Stephanie March’s divorce is not what you’d call amicable.

The couple split in early April after 10 years of marriage and March is challenging the prenup under which Flay is required to pay the actress $ 5,000 a month.

In Touch reports that March is challenging the prenup on the grounds that Flay allegedly cheated on her with three women, including actress January Jones.

A source familiar with the case told the magazine that the former “Law & Order: SVU” actress is claiming in court papers that the 50-year-old celebrity chef “committed adultery” with Jones several times in the in early 2010. The magazine also reports that March has accused Flay of cheating with a food stylist and his assistant.

Page Six previously reported that it’s believed the couple’s prenup had no infidelity clause, and if true, March’s claims likely would not help her cause. However, TMZ reported that the actress also filed documents claiming that it’s her “amazing palate” that is responsible for his success.

Reps for Flay and Jones have yet to respond to requests for comment.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Style – The Huffington Post
FASHION NEWS UPDATE-Visit Shoe Deals Online today for the hottest deals online for shoes!

Fight Over Sony Music’s Streaming Income May Be Headed to Appeals Court

On Monday, an attorney for an American Idol-affiliated record company asked a federal judge in New York for permission to take a dispute over… Music News

Hot entertainment tips and specials!
Download FREE Music for your iPod® or any MP3 player!

Need those hard to get tickets?
Call Now: 877-516-9953

In Four Supreme Court Clashes Over 15 Years, a Consensus for Equality Emerges

Photo by Joshua Glick

The giddy atmosphere outside the Supreme Court Tuesday afternoon was only slightly more festive than the mood in the courtroom itself. As expected, civil rights legend Mary Bonauto knocked it out of the park for marriage equality. But something bigger was in the air — a sense that history wasn’t just turning but had, in some basic sense, turned.

It wasn’t only that the other side’s arguments have imploded, though there was that.

John Bursch, the Michigan lawyer charged with defending discrimination, spent most of his time arguing that gay people marrying will somehow convey that marriage is now about couples rather than children (despite the hundreds of thousands of gay families raising kids), which in turn will cause straight people to have more children out of wedlock.

Also, if a woman weighs the same as a duck, she is made of wood and is therefore a witch.

Bursch did, however, avoid the ever less plausible argument that the freedom to marry is somehow anti-religion — no doubt aware of the quickening embrace of equality by mainstream denominations and millions of religious Americans. That didn’t stop Justice Scalia from repeatedly insisting that ministers could be forced to perform same-sex wedding services as a condition of exercising civil marriage authority. You know, like rabbis are now forced to marry interfaith couples.

That, and a few lingering questions on polygamy, is really about all they have left.

Beyond the lopsided merits, there was a powerful sense in the courtroom that our community has broken through. Even the conservative justices engaged seriously and respectfully (well, Scalia will be Scalia). And a majority of justices bluntly stated their impatience with arguments that fail to recognize the dignity and equality of gay families. It felt like a cultural moment had arrived — confirmation of acceptance and respect that would have been unthinkable a generation ago.

Photo by Joshua Glick

Contrast the 1986 oral argument in Bowers v. Hardwick, in which a constitutional challenge to criminalization of private intimate conduct was mischaracterized as being about a “right to commit sodomy” and constitutional scholar Larry Tribe was peppered with hypotheticals about sex in public toilets. I wasn’t there for Bowers, thank goodness, but at three other oral arguments over the last fifteen years (all in cases where my firm submitted briefs), I was privileged to witness progress unfold towards Tuesday’s culmination.

First came Dale v. Boy Scouts, in 2000, in which Evan Wolfson (also basking this week in well-earned marriage glory) faced down a skeptical Supreme Court on behalf of James Dale, an Eagle Scout and junior scoutmaster tossed from Scouting when he came out in college. In those days, the Scouts still argued that only heterosexual boys could be “clean” and “morally straight,” and LGBT advocates felt compelled to submit social science briefs explaining that gay people were not mentally ill pederasts — what we used to call the “Homo 101” brief.

On the ground, Dale was a game changer, jump-starting awareness of the irrationality of antigay discrimination. But sitting in court, there was a sense of uphill effort as the justices seemed more concerned with protecting Scouting’s right to enforce its own moral code than with preventing discrimination — previewing the Court’s ruling that the Scouts were a private association immune from civil rights regulation.

Just three years later, when Lawrence v. Texas came before the Court, much had changed. Seventeen years after Bowers, sodomy laws appeared even more obviously archaic, and the issue presented no First Amendment complications. The cause was now represented by Paul Smith — an openly gay law firm partner well known to the justices as a former law clerk and SCOTUS regular.

The argument this time felt more like a tutorial than a battle for respect. There were still some wince-worthy moments — as when Justice Scalia asked Smith whether states could bar gay kindergarten teachers to keep kids off “the path of homosexuality.” But Smith’s insider status made it easier for him to tell the Court how wrong they had gotten it in Bowers — reframing the issue in universal terms tied to fundamental American values of privacy and autonomy: “Most Americans would be shocked to find out that their decision to engage in sexual intimacy with another person in their own home might lead to a knock on the door” and a criminal prosecution.

The Court listened. Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion struck down the Texas law as a violation of personal liberty and expressly overturned Bowers. The Court confirmed that gay people, like any other group, are entitled to respect for their intimate, private choices and free to invoke Constitutional principles “in their own search for greater freedom.” Justice Scalia’s dissent lamented — presciently — that rejecting moral disapproval as a ground for sodomy laws also eliminated the main argument against recognizing the freedom to marry for same-sex couples.

How right he was. Of course, work on marriage equality (masterminded by trailblazers Bonauto and Wolfson) had already begun years earlier in Hawaii, Vermont, and of course Massachusetts, where same-sex couples began marrying in May 2004, less than a year after the Lawrence decision.

Photo by Joshua Glick

It took nearly a decade to get back before SCOTUS, as marriage equality advanced in fits and starts in courts, legislatures, and ballot referendums across the country. By the time United States v. Windsor hit the Court in 2013 — challenging DOMA’s federal recognition ban — the tide had shifted, with nine states allowing marriage and public support topping fifty percent.

That momentum was reflected at oral argument, where the pro-equality side for the first time seemed to have the upper hand right out of the box. Even before Robbie Kaplan rose to argue for Edie Windsor, Justice Ginsberg had set the tone with her “skim milk marriage” quip and Justice Kagan had stopped Paul Clement’s defense of DOMA in its tracks by showing that Congress had been motivated by the kind of moral disapproval rejected in Lawrence. This was followed by U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli arguing DOMA’s unconstitutionality on behalf of the Obama administration.

What a change from Evan Wolfson’s brave, solitary stand. When Kaplan took the podium, it was Chief Justice Roberts who seemed on the defensive — acknowledging what Kaplan described as a “sea change” in attitudes towards gay families and noting that politicians were “falling over themselves to endorse” marriage equality. When he tried to flip the issue and suggest that the gay community was now too powerful to require heightened constitutional protection, Kaplan recounted lost marriage battles and other recent discrimination — driving home that the “sea change” was a product of evolving moral understanding rather than political clout.

Windsor, of course, struck down the federal recognition portion of DOMA and sparked an astonishing two years of further litigation, legislation, and public education in which marriage has grown from nine to thirty-seven states and public support for the freedom to marry has hit sixty-three percent nationwide.

All of which brought us to Tuesday, where the argument felt even more one-sided than Windsor. Bonauto, with her trademark quiet intensity, eloquently set forth how exclusion from civil marriage needlessly demeans and harms gay people and their families. The conservative justices pushed back on the length of time marriage had been limited to different-sex couples, but Bonauto explained other ways that marriage has evolved over time and evoked Lawrence in arguing that “times can blind and it takes time to see stereotypes and to see the common humanity of people who had once been ignored or excluded.”

And as to the perennial question of “who” gets to decide marriage, Bonauto beautifully summed up that “it’s not about the Court versus the States. It’s about the individual making the choice to marry and with whom to marry, or the government.”

There was some anxiety when Justice Kennedy, too, questioned changing a definition of marriage that had been around for “millennia” (actually, not true) — but he later re-emphasized the concern he expressed in Windsor for the well-being of children of gay parents and his moral understanding that same-sex couples seek to share in the “nobility and sacredness of marriage.”

Mary Bonauto and co-counsel meet the press. Photo by Jeffrey S. Trachtman

No one wants to jinx it, but most observers expect another favorable 5-4 vote and have the champagne on ice for the kind of emotional celebration that marked Pride 2011 (when marriage was enacted in New York) and 2013 (following the Windsor decision).

Winning marriage is, of course, just a step along the road to justice. Marriage doesn’t serve everyone equally, and there is plenty left to do to protect LGBTQ youth and elders, achieve equality for our trans and genderqueer neighbors, and advance broader social justice. For many of us in D.C., the events in nearby Baltimore gave the day a bittersweet flavor. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t savor this moment of impending triumph, but let’s keep it in perspective: no rest until everyone is free, safe, and equal.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Gay Voices – The Huffington Post gay - First Date 300x250

3 Rights Gay Couples Will Get If Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Gay Marriage

In Washington, D.C., today, the U.S. Supreme Court started hearing arguments in Obergefell v. Hodges, a case that could determine whether same-sex marriage is a constitutional right. While the court likely won't rule until June,…

Subscribe to All
FASHION NEWS UPDATE-Visit 2 Spendless Online today for the hottest deals online!

Appeals Court Agrees to Review SiriusXM’s Challenge Over Pre-1972 Music

The 2nd Circuit will take up the issue of whether New York protects the public performance of older songs — and whether that violates the U.S. Constitution.
Music News Headlines – Yahoo News

Appeals Court Agrees to Review Sirius XM’s Challenge Over Pre-1972 Music

The 2nd Circuit will take up the issue of whether New York protects the public performance of older songs — and whether that violates the U.S. Constitution.
Music News Headlines – Yahoo News

Robin Williams — Judge Tells Widow & Kids … Squash Property Beef Out of Court

Robin Williams’ children and his widow have 11 days to settle their war over his personal items … before a judge weighs in on the dispute. During a hearing in San Francisco today … the judge urged both parties to meet outside court — possibly with…


TMZ Celebrity News for Celebrity Justice

Killer Mike: Rap Lyrics Being Manipulated in Court to Land Convictions

Last December, Killer Mike and author Erik Nielson teamed to pen an op-ed examining how the criminal justice system often employs rap lyrics as a means to convict suspects. The Run the Jewels rapper’s first column focused on the case of Anthony Elonis, and now in their latest op-ed for Vox that examines hip-hop’s “poetic (in)justice,”… News


In Kony Hunt, US Uses Pop Music to Court Defectors

In Kony Hunt, US Uses Pop Music to Court DefectorsThree and a half years after President Barack Obama sent 100 special operations troops to Africa to help root out Lord’s Resistance Army leader Joseph Kony – so far unsuccessfully – the broader U.S.-supported international anti-LRA team has resorted to using a truly unstoppable force against the alleged war criminal: pop music. Chameleone composed the song in 2013 at the behest of U.S. embassy officers who were looking for innovative ways to reach would-be defectors, according to Marty Regan, a field representative for the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations in Uganda. “I am simply waiting for my brothers in the LRA to come home.

Music News Headlines – Yahoo News

The Saga Is Over: Amanda Knox Acquitted Of Murder By Italy’s Highest Court

Amanda Knox and ex-boyfriend acquitted of murder by Italy’s highest court.

Amanda Knox Murder Conviction Overturned by Italy High Court

The supreme Court of Cassation overturned last year’s convictions by a Florence appeals court, and declined to order another trial.

read more


U.S. Court Halts Labor Department Protection For Same-Sex Couples

(Adds background)

By Jon Herskovitz

AUSTIN, Texas, March 26 (Reuters) – A U.S. district judge in Texas on Thursday issued a stay to halt the U.S. Labor Department from implementing a rule that would expand medical leave protections for same-sex couples, saying the move impinges on the rights of states that ban gay marriage.

The state of Texas, which has a state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, last week sued the Labor Department over the rule that would grant family medical leave protections to all married same-sex couples.

“The public maintains an abiding interest in preserving the rule of law and enforcing the states’ duly enacted laws from federal encroachment,” wrote Reed O’Connor, a district judge in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

Texas was the first challenge to the department’s rule, which is set to take effect on Friday. Arkansas, Louisiana and Nebraska also joined the suit.

The rule requires companies to follow the marriage laws of the states in which their employees were wed, rather than where they reside, for the purpose of applying the federal Family and Medical Leave Act. That law requires employers to grant workers unpaid leave after giving birth or to care for sick family members.

“We are pleased that the Department of Labor’s effort to override our laws via federal rule-making has been halted, and we will continue to defend our sovereignty in this case,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a statement.

The rule has been hailed by gay rights groups and attorneys who represent workers and has divided employers. Some companies say it will impose a hefty burden on them to know the relevant laws and employees’ personal information. Others say the opposite, that a uniform policy will ease the financial stress of complying with a patchwork of laws.

The U.S. Supreme Court next month is scheduled to consider for the first time whether there is a constitutional right to marry. A ruling in favor of same-sex couples would likely moot the family leave issue.

(Reporting by Jon Herskovitz; Additional reporting by Daniel Wiessner in New York; Editing by Eric Beech)

Gay Voices – The Huffington Post gay - First Date 300x250

Knight’s bail set at $25 million; rap mogul collapses in court

Mar 20 – A judge sets bail at $ 25 million for Suge Knight in a murder case and the rap mogul collapses immediately after the hearing. Phil Furey reports.

Reuters Video: Entertainment

Find your Soulmate Live webcam chat!

Suge Knight collapses in court, Chris Brown released from probation

Mar 20 – The day’s top showbiz news and headlines including Suge Knight collapses in court, Chris Brown’s legal victory, and Celine Dion announces return to Vegas. Phil Furey reports.

Reuters Video: Entertainment

Find your Soulmate Live webcam chat!

Chris Brown Court Hearing — He WON’T Be Thrown in Jail

2:15 PM PT — The judge just signed off, and Chris is officially off probation … and out of the legal system. It’s been 6 years and 1 month since he beat Rihanna on the night before the Grammys. IM OFF PROBATION!!!!!!!! Thank the Lord!!!!!! —…


TMZ Celebrity News for Celebrity Justice

Suge Knight — Collapses in Court Nailed with $25 MILLION Bail

Attorney Matt Fletcher threw a Hail Mary, accusing the prosecutor of watching too much “Empire.” Fletcher, said, “It’s like she watches “Empire” and comes in and says, ‘He was an unrepentant and shameless criminal. Prosecute him.'” As you know ……


TMZ Celebrity News for Music

Suge Knight Collapses in Court After Bail Set at $25 Million

Moments after a Los Angeles judge ruled that Suge Knight be held on $ 25 million bail stemming from murder charges, the Death Row mogul collapsed in the courthouse. The unconscious Knight was rushed to a jail hospital ward, the Los Angeles Times reports.

While Knight has allegedly suffered health problems throughout… News


Court Testimony From The Hot Naked Chick From Blurred Lines

Court Testimony From The Hot Naked Chick From Blurred Lines

Court Testimony From The Hot Naked Ch…
That really hot naked chick from the “Blurred Lines” video takes the stand in the Robin Thicke / Marvin Gaye family case.
Submitted by: mikescollins
Keywords: emily ratajkowski blurred lines robin thicke pharrell pharrell williams marvin gaye what's going on naked chick Emily Ratajkowski nude Emily Ratajkowski naked robin thicke blurred lines marvin gaye blurred lines
Views: 211,000

Funny or Die | Funny Videos, Funny Video Clips, Funny Pictures

Robin Thicke — I Lost in Court … But Won Lots Of Birthday Boobies

Robin Thicke had 7.3 million reasons to crawl into a big dark hole Tuesday night, but instead he chose to fill it with champagne and half-naked chicks to blow-out his 38th birthday party. TMZ obtained pics from inside Thicke’s party — which started at…


TMZ Celebrity News for Party All The Time

Sean Kingston — Diamond Guy Cuts Him Down to Size in Court

Sean Kingston just bought some expensive jewelry … against his will. Let’s just say it’s a court-ordered purchase. Sean skated off with $ 226k worth of jewelry from 2008-2013 but never paid a dime … this according to Avi Da Jeweler who filed a…


TMZ Celebrity News for Celebrity Justice

American Voices: Court: Man Can’t Sue Applebee’s For Burning Self On Fajitas While Praying

An appellate court in New Jersey ruled this week that an Applebee’s customer who bowed his head close to his table for prayer before a meal and burned his face on a plate of sizzling-hot fajitas cannot sue the restaurant for damages, saying that hot…

The Onion

American Voices: Court: Man Can’t Sue Applebee’s For Burning Self On Fajitas While Praying

An appellate court in New Jersey ruled this week that an Applebee’s customer who bowed his head close to his table for prayer before a meal and burned his face on a plate of sizzling-hot fajitas cannot sue the restaurant for damages, saying that hot…

The Onion

Lawyer in India Takes Retailers to Court for ‘Abetting Gay Sex’

An attorney in India has filed a criminal complaint against two retail websites that sell sex toys and novelties — and | Top Stories

‘Blurred Lines’ Trial: Robin Thicke Performs Piano Medley In Court

The artist testified on the second day of the trial, with Pharrell and several members of Marvin Gaye’s family present in court.

read more

Hollywood Reporter

Robin Thicke Sang, Danced and Played the Piano During His Court Testimony in ”Blurred Lines” Trial

Robin ThickeThis is a new approach.

Robin Thicke took the stand on Wednesday in a Los Angeles court for his copyright trial against Marvin Gaye’s children, which will decide whether his 2013 hit…

E! Online (US) – Top Stories
Entertainment News! –

Explore the world of Hustler today! Click now and enjoy…

Explore REAL today for the most erotic amateur sex online! Click now and enjoy!

Visit VCAXX Classics for the classics in adult entertainment at its best! Click now!

Hustler Taboo features the kinkiest sex online! Click now and enjoy!

Tyga Faces Heavy Fines For Missed Court Date

Tyga ha a new quandary to deal with.

This time the rapper has to contend with a former business partner than alleges the rapper used his clothing line designs without compensating him.

Tyga faces a $ 10,000 dollar fine because he skipped a court ordered mediation to settle the dispute.

Glennon Marrero, Tyga’s former partner, charges that he was never paid for his designs with th Last Kings clothing line.

sued the rapper last year over inappropriate usage over graphic design work. Marrero believes that Tyga used his designs for the clothing line Last Kings without proper compensation.

Tyga has maintained in public records the he gave Marrero a piece of the company, not necessarily monies derived from the work. Tyga also maintains that his former business partner left Last Kings in 2012.

In legal documents, Marrero outlines his case, charging that Tyga must pay up $ 10,900 in penalties.

Filed under: News Tagged: Tyga

50 Cent Calls Jimmy Henchman Washed Up, Posts Court Documents

50 Cent takes to Instagram to call Jimmy Henchman "washed up," "Jimmy Snitchman."

HipHopDX News

Marriage Equality Is a National Issue, And So the Time Has Come for Our National Court to Address It

The Supreme Court has been reluctant to jump into the question of same-sex marriage, preferring to let the issue percolate through state-by-state litigation in the lower federal courts.  But the time has come for the justices to come out of hiding.  The denial of marriage equality is a national problem, not a state-level problem, and it requires a national resolution that only our nation’s constitutional court can provide.

At the moment, 35 states allow marriage equality, while 15 forbid it.  The anti-equality states not only refuse to allow same-sex marriages to be licensed and celebrated; 14 of them also refuse to recognize marriages from sister states where such unions are perfectly legal.  Petitions from cases in four of those states – Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee – will be considered by the justices at their next private conference this coming Friday.

One reason marriage equality is a national issue is that our current patchwork of marriage laws imposes unreasonable, indeed absurd, burdens on same-sex couples’ security in their marriages and their freedom to move from state to state.  A married gay couple from a pro-equality state can relocate for job, education or family reasons to an anti-equality state – as long as they’re willing to give up their marriage, and perhaps even their property and parental rights.  A rational legal regime cannot tolerate this state of affairs.

In a 2012 article in the Michigan Law Review, I first proposed that the Constitution provides not only a right to get married, but a right to remain married.  Multiple federal court decisions, including one from the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals involving Utah’s marriage laws, have since endorsed this principle.  There is also an argument to be made that denial of interstate marriage recognition offends the Constitution's Full Faith and Credit Clause.

Aside from the harms they inflict on couples, inconsistent state marriage laws also cost American businesses $ 1.3 billion per year, according to a study released in October by the consulting group Marsh and McLennan Companies.  “As marriage confers a host of legal and social privileges,” the report explains, “the irregular landscape generates a host of administrative and compliance requirements for employers."

A patchwork of marriage laws also means a tax penalty for employers and employees in states without the freedom to marry, because the value of spousal health insurance and other benefits for an employee in a same-sex household is treated as ordinary income, triggering additional payroll and income taxes.  “As many corporate leaders now view national freedom to marry as inevitable,” the Marsh and McLennan report observes, “they would prefer that this tax and compliance burden disappear sooner rather than later."

There is another important reason why marriage equality should be settled at the national level: that is where the campaign to ban it has always been fought.

Although same-sex marriage was not possible in the United States until a decade ago, affirmative and categorical prohibitions are a relatively recent phenomenon.  The first state constitutional amendments banning marriage equality were not passed until 1998, when voters in Alaska and Hawaii approved measures effectively overturning state court rulings favorable to marriage equality.  By 2008, only 10 years later, more than 30 states had approved such measures. 

Aside from the harms they impose, I have argued that the process that was used to enact these measures raises serious constitutional concerns.  It is fanciful to believe that these laws were the products of carefully considered, historically validated, independent policy decisions by each state, and thus worthy of deference as a matter of federalism.  For the most part these laws were, in fact, products of a determined, nationwide blitzkrieg by religious conservative activists and Republican operatives.  In the 2004 elections, President George W. Bush’s strategist Karl Rove helped oversee efforts that saw 11 anti-marriage equality measures approved in one swoop.  James Dobson, founder of the once-powerful group Focus on the Family, called the nationwide fight against gay marriage “our D-Day, or Gettysburg or Stalingrad.” 

The campaign was one of classic backlash:  it sought to exploit short-term public passions and prejudices to slam the door on marriage equality just as a national debate was starting to emerge on the issue.  As CNN’s report the day after the 2004 elections described it, “Six months after gay and lesbian couples won the right to marry in Massachusetts, opponents of same-sex marriage struck back” with amendments in 11 states “codifying marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution.” 

Experience demonstrates that when Americans learn more about gay people and their relationships, they become more likely to support marriage equality.  Even while marriage equality opponents were still enjoying success at the voting booth, attitudes were evolving: between 1998 and 2009, the average vote against mini-DOMAs in statewide referenda increased from 31 percent to 46 percent.

If the remaining marriage bans took the form of ordinary statutes that could be revisited by legislatures in light of the growing majority support for same-sex marriage, there might be less reason for the Supreme Court to act right now.  But all 15 remaining bans are in the form of state constitutional amendments, which are much harder to undo because they typically require legislative supermajorities, votes in multiple legislative sessions, and/or statewide voter referenda.

This emphasis on constitutional amendments also was a deliberate strategy pursued at the national level by anti-gay-marriage activists.  The goal was not merely to enact laws that appealed to lawmakers and voters at the time, but to place the question of same-sex marriage beyond democratic debate and the ordinary lawmaking process – that is, persuading a simple majority of your elected representatives, the way most laws are made or repealed – in as many states as possible, for as long as possible.  The spirit of these efforts was captured by a Georgia Republican politician who urged his state to adopt a constitutional amendment because it would “set in stone that marriage in this country is a union between one man and one woman.  The laws of man did not create marriage; the laws of man should not alter marriage.”

The campaign against same-sex marriage has seen its fortunes dramatically reversed in the past few years.  Many Americans who once opposed gay marriage have, with better information and greater reflection, changed their minds.  It is an important principle of the Supreme Court's equality jurisprudence that courts should not intervene in such matters too hastily, because “the Constitution presumes that even improvident decisions” by lawmakers or voters can “eventually be rectified by the democratic processes.” But in the 15 states where anti-equality laws remain, they are embedded in state constitutions, and the ordinary democratic lawmaking process cannot address them.

And so the time has come for the Supreme Court to step in.  The campaign against marriage equality was mapped and executed at the national level, and it continues to impose harms and indignities on individuals and businesses that reverberate across state boundaries.  The validity of such laws should be weighed and ruled upon by the justices whose responsibility it is to interpret and apply our highest national law, the Constitution.

Gay Voices – The Huffington Post gay - First Date 300x250

Actor Dustin Diamond, accused of stabbing, appears in Wisconsin court

Actor Dustin Diamond, who played the nerdy “Screech” on the sitcom “Saved by the Bell,” appears in court in Wisconsin where he is accused of stabbing a man. Nathan Frandino reports.

Reuters Video: Entertainment

Find your Soulmate Live webcam chat!

Dustin Diamond’s Day In Court

Dustin Diamond, the actor who played Screech in the 1990s television show ‘Saved by the Bell,’ has appeared in a Wisconsin courtroom.

Access Hollywood Latest News

Lil Wayne — Warns Birdman … My Next Rant’s Gonna Be in Court!

Lil Wayne is ready to take his feud with Birdman to the next level … threatening to drag him and Cash Money into court if they don’t drop his album NOW. Sources very close to the feud tell TMZ … Wayne has issued a simple…


TMZ Celebrity News for Celebrity Justice

Singapore: Indian Drama ‘Court’ Wins Best Feature at Silver Screen Awards

First-timer Chaitanya Tamhane also won best director for the film

read more


High Court Rules Nagging Constitutional


What will be the effect on marriage of the recent ruling by the state’s highest court that according to the Times struck “down a statute that made it a felony to communicate with someone ‘in a manner likely to cause annoyance or harm.'”(“Top Court Champions Freedom to Annoy,” NYT, 5/13/14)?

The Times went on to point out that,

“Ronald L. Kuby, one of the lawyers involved in the original case, called the decision a victory for ‘the demented and dissident, the crazies and the critical, the malcontents and the maladjusted–amen.'”

The ruling came in response to the case of Raphael Golb who according to the Times, “waged a yearslong campaign against academic rivals of his father, Norman Golb, a Dead Sea Scrolls scholar.” First of all Raphael is plainly the kind of kid that every academic dreams of having. Dogs will die for you, but children these days rarely fight their parents’ intellectual turf wars. However, more importantly, what the New York State’s Court of Appeals has done in one fell swoop is to turn something that was considered problematic into socially acceptable behavior. In so doing experts in the field of matrimony predict that the decision will ring a death knell for the marriage counseling industry which has thrived on the attempt to curb nagging among both married and unmarried couples. In some circles the decision by the court has been compared to the repeal of the Volstead Act, which originally ushered in prohibition. With the repeal of both The Volstead Act and the statute prohibiting annoying behavior a couple can now come home after a hard day’s work, mix a few martinis and spend the evening fighting.

{This was originally posted to The Screaming Pope, Francis Levy’s blog of rant and reactions to contemporary politics, art and culture}
Comedy – The Huffington Post
ENTERTAINMENT NEWS-Visit Mobile Playboy today for the hottest adult entertainment online!

Simon, Brickell court case continued until June 17

Paul Simon, Edie Brickell appear in court for disorderly conduct case; next hearing in June
MSN Music: News
ADULT ENTERTAINMENT NEWS UPDATE:Gabby Love’s top pick! Click and enjoy!

Cellist Yo-Yo Ma plays Supreme Court

Aural argument? Yo-Yo Ma plays 300-year-old cello for Supreme Court justices
MSN Music: News
ADULT ENTERTAINMENT NEWS UPDATE:Gabby Love’s top pick! Click and enjoy!

‘Game of Thrones’ Recap: Disorder in the Court

Theon Greyjoy has gone to the dogs Literally – that’s where cackling psychopath Ramsay Snow keeps his prime plaything who now answers only to the name “Reek” It’s a smart move Offered the chance to escape Reek bites the hand that “frees” him running back to his kennel like an… All News