SCOTUS Orders Maine To Revoke Rep. Libby's Censure

4,452 Views | 49 Replies | Last: 8 mo ago by ts5641
Gaeilge
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:41p, 5/20/25
Supreme Court orders Maine legislature to revoke censure of Rep. Laurel Libby over trans athlete post

Quote:
The U.S. Supreme Court ordered the Maine state legislature to revoke its censure of GOP state representative Laurel Libby on Tuesday.

Libby has been censured since Feb. 15 for a social media post that identified a transgender Maine high school athlete who won a girls' pole vault competition. Democrat majority leader and Maine Speaker of the House Ryan Fecteau told Libby that the censure would be revoked if she apologized for the social media post, but Libby has firmly refused.
Quote:
Libby had the support of the U.S. Department of Justice and Attorney General Pam Bondi, who filed an amicus brief supporting Libby in her lawsuit, and Bondi has personally spoken out in support of the embattled Republican state representative.

"The Department of Justice is proud to fight for girls in Maine and stand alongside Rep. Libby, who is being attacked simply for defending girls in her home state. As our lawsuit against the state of Maine illustrates, we will always protect girls' sports and girls' spaces from radical gender ideology," Bondi told Fox News Digital.
**** the Maine democrats for trying to silence conservatives. I hope Libby primaries that old, worthless ***** Collins!
Reply Quote
techno-ag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:43p, 5/20/25
What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Conservatives need to start bringing judges in to micromanage EVERYTHING.
Trump will fix it.
Reply Quote
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:45p, 5/20/25
7-2


Can you guess the Two?

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to techno-ag • 2:45p, 5/20/25
techno-ag said:
What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Conservatives need to start bringing judges in to micromanage EVERYTHING.
That is NOT what happened here. Try again!

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
Captain Pablo
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:46p, 5/20/25
7-2 decision

I'll give you 2 guesses
Reply Quote
Gaeilge
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Captain Pablo • 2:48p, 5/20/25
Captain Pablo said:
7-2 decision

I'll give you 2 guesses
I'm actually surpriesd Kagan didn't join the other two knuckleheads.
Reply Quote
Captain Pablo
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Gaeilge • 2:49p, 5/20/25
Gaeilge said:
Captain Pablo said:
7-2 decision

I'll give you 2 guesses
I'm actually surpriesd Kagan didn't join the other two knuckleheads.


I'm not

She breaks from them at times
Reply Quote
1 edit
SA68AG
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Gaeilge • 2:51p, 5/20/25
Gaeilge said:
Captain Pablo said:
7-2 decision

I'll give you 2 guesses
I'm actually surpriesd Kagan didn't join the other two knuckleheads.
Kagan actually has a functioning brain.
Reply Quote
waitwhat?
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 2:52p, 5/20/25
Im Gipper said:
7-2


Can you guess the Two?
Even Jackson said the reason for her dissent was that it didn't constitute an emergency. She didn't say anything about the merits of the censure.
" 'People that read with pictures think that it's simply about a mask' - Dana Loesch" - Ban Cow Gas

"Truth is treason in the empire of lies." - Dr. Ron Paul

Big Tech IS the empire of lies

TEXIT
Reply Quote
Captain Pablo
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to waitwhat? • 2:54p, 5/20/25
waitwhat? said:
Im Gipper said:
7-2


Can you guess the Two?
Even Jackson said the reason for her dissent was that it didn't constitute an emergency. She didn't say anything about the merits of the censure.


Yeah. She found an excuse
Reply Quote
1 edit
nortex97
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 2:54p, 5/20/25
When the left loses even ACB…
Reply Quote
Tramp96
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:01p, 5/20/25
Can I ask a dumb question?

Why did a state legislative censure get elevated to the SCOTUS? Isn't a censure basically meaningless? Or was this censure preventing the lawmaker from being able to do things?

Forgive my ignorance on this. I just thought censures were like demerits. Nominal slap on the wrist with no teeth.

EDIT: Never mind...this censure actually did have teeth. From much further down in the article:

Quote:
Rule 401(11) provides that a member found by the body to be in breach of its rules may not participate in floor debates or vote on matters before the full House until they have 'made satisfaction,' i.e., here, apologized for their breach."
Reply Quote
2 edits
The Moffitt Show
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Tramp96 • 3:03p, 5/20/25
They were letting her speak or vote
Reply Quote
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Captain Pablo • 3:04p, 5/20/25
Captain Pablo said:
Gaeilge said:
Captain Pablo said:
7-2 decision

I'll give you 2 guesses
I'm actually surpriesd Kagan didn't join the other two knuckleheads.


I'm not

She breaks from them at times


In 2023, in non-unanimous cases, Kagan sided with Jackson 89% of the time and Sotomayor 95% of the time.

I believe that works out to two and one opinion in which Kagan did not agree with them.


I don't think the numbers have been released yet for 2024

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
2 edits
Ryan the Temp
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Captain Pablo • 3:30p, 5/20/25
Captain Pablo said:
waitwhat? said:
Im Gipper said:
7-2


Can you guess the Two?
Even Jackson said the reason for her dissent was that it didn't constitute an emergency. She didn't say anything about the merits of the censure.


Yeah. She found an excuse
SCOTUS quite frequently tries to use very narrow issues or technicalities to decide cases to avoid addressing the more controversial aspects of those cases.
Reply Quote
lb3
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:37p, 5/20/25
I guess I don't understand the case. How can SCOUTS tell a state legislature that they have to undo a vote to discipline one of their members?

A censure is a meaningless condemnation. It basically just means that the majority of the body doesn't like them.
Reply Quote
Gaeilge
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to lb3 • 3:42p, 5/20/25
lb3 said:
I guess I don't understand the case. How can SCOUTS tell a state legislature that they have to undo a vote to discipline one of their members?

A censure is a meaningless condemnation. It basically just means that the majority of the body doesn't like them.
Maine's censure removes their ability to speak and vote on the floor. It isn't just a condemnation there.
Reply Quote
lb3
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Gaeilge • 3:42p, 5/20/25
Thanks for the clarification.
Reply Quote
Captain Pablo
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ryan the Temp • 3:59p, 5/20/25
Ryan the Temp said:
Captain Pablo said:
waitwhat? said:
Im Gipper said:
7-2


Can you guess the Two?
Even Jackson said the reason for her dissent was that it didn't constitute an emergency. She didn't say anything about the merits of the censure.


Yeah. She found an excuse
SCOTUS quite frequently tries to use very narrow issues or technicalities to decide cases to avoid addressing the more controversial aspects of those cases.


I get that

But here, the Supreme Court didn't do that
Reply Quote
techno-ag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:06p, 5/20/25
Maine Justice!

Trump will fix it.
Reply Quote
AggiePetro07
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Gaeilge • 4:25p, 5/20/25
Gaeilge said:
Captain Pablo said:
7-2 decision

I'll give you 2 guesses
I'm actually surpriesd Kagan didn't join the other two knuckleheads.


She's not an idiot. She's a very sharp legal mind.

The other two are diversity hires.
Reply Quote
Gaeilge
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AggiePetro07 • 4:31p, 5/20/25
AggiePetro07 said:
Gaeilge said:
Captain Pablo said:
7-2 decision

I'll give you 2 guesses
I'm actually surpriesd Kagan didn't join the other two knuckleheads.


She's not an idiot. She's a very sharp legal mind.

The other two are diversity hires.


Her track record says otherwise.
Reply Quote
MemphisAg1
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Gaeilge • 8:47p, 5/20/25
Gaeilge said:
lb3 said:
I guess I don't understand the case. How can SCOUTS tell a state legislature that they have to undo a vote to discipline one of their members?

A censure is a meaningless condemnation. It basically just means that the majority of the body doesn't like them.
Maine's censure removes their ability to speak and vote on the floor. It isn't just a condemnation there.
Beyond the pale for Maine Democrats to cancel her right to vote in the state legislature because of her opinion.

That's what elected representatives are supposed to do... advocate for policy, conservative or liberal, based on their constituents.

Totally unconscionable act by the Maine Dems.

But then again, that's what Dems do. There is no limit on how low they will go to advance their agenda.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Ghost of Andrew Eaton
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:51p, 5/20/25
Isn't this a state issue?
Reply Quote
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ghost of Andrew Eaton • 8:52p, 5/20/25
Violating her constitutional rights and preventing her from representing her constituents?
Reply Quote
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ghost of Andrew Eaton • 8:58p, 5/20/25
Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
Isn't this a state issue?


A State cannot violate the first amendment or the guarantee of a Republican form of government!

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
Ghost of Andrew Eaton
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ellis Wyatt • 9:18p, 5/20/25
Ellis Wyatt said:
Violating her constitutional rights and preventing her from representing her constituents?


If they followed their state constitution and their parliamentary rules, I don't see why they can't. As far as I can tell, Maine's last three censures have led to denial of the right to speak on the floor.

I agree with her stance but states get to decide how their legislature works.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Who?mikejones!
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ghost of Andrew Eaton • 9:21p, 5/20/25
Because state rules and parliamentary rules cannot violate the 1st amendment.

Which reminds me as a random aside, roberts rules of order are un-American
Reply Quote
1 edit
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ghost of Andrew Eaton • 9:21p, 5/20/25
Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
Ellis Wyatt said:
Violating her constitutional rights and preventing her from representing her constituents?


If they followed their state constitution and their parliamentary rules, I don't see why they can't.

I agree with her stance but states get to decide how their legislature works.



Read the constitution. Specifically 1st Amendment, 14th Amendment and Guarantee Clause Article IV, Section 4

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ghost of Andrew Eaton • 9:21p, 5/20/25
If you don't see why, you should consider opening your eyes.
Reply Quote
Ciboag96
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:22p, 5/20/25
The "anti-fascist" left are about as fascist as you can get without invading Poland.
Reply Quote
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Who?mikejones! • 9:23p, 5/20/25
Who?mikejones! said:
Because state rules a d parliamentary rules cannot violate the 1st amendment.

Which reminds me as a random aside, roberts rules of order are un-American



They are written by an American general. The same American general that designed the Galveston Seawall!

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
Who?mikejones!
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 9:23p, 5/20/25
I actually know that random factoid!

Reply Quote
MemphisAg1
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ghost of Andrew Eaton • 9:24p, 5/20/25
Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
Ellis Wyatt said:
Violating her constitutional rights and preventing her from representing her constituents?


If they followed their state constitution and their parliamentary rules, I don't see why they can't. As far as I can tell, Maine's last three censures have led to denial of the right to speak on the floor.

I agree with her stance but states get to decide how their legislature works.
States can't operate in a way that violate fundament rights under the US Constitution.

Federal supremacy > state rights
Reply Quote
Ghost of Andrew Eaton
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Who?mikejones! • 9:25p, 5/20/25
Who?mikejones! said:
Because state rules and parliamentary rules cannot violate the 1st amendment.

Which reminds me as a random aside, roberts rules of order are un-American


Not according to the Supreme Court's ruling in Nevada Commission on Ethics v. Carrigan.
Reply Quote
Page 1 of 2 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.