Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They are claiming that she didn't get due process. I'm not sure what they consider due process, but she was sued, went to court, and appealed all the way to the supreme court. I thought that was due process.
You don't get a trial for contempt of court-- There is no finding of fact to adjudicate. She violated the judges order. She admits she did so. The only thing left is the judges discretion as to what the consequence shall be.
"To defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic"
Since Kim Davis is defying the constitution, seems like a bunch of off-purpose attention whoring to me.
She didn't defy the constitution, she defied the SC. There is no mention of marriage in the Constitution. You should be more worried about Obama and almost ALL Dems violating the Constitution on a weekly, if not daily basis.
She didn't defy the constitution, she defied the SC. There is no mention of marriage in the Constitution. You should be more worried about Obama and almost ALL Dems violating the Constitution on a weekly, if not daily basis.
According the the Constitution the SC are the ultimate arbiters of it's meaning.
You don't get a trial for contempt of court-- There is no finding of fact to adjudicate. She violated the judges order. She admits she did so. The only thing left is the judges discretion as to what the consequence shall be.
The contempt charge was from a preliminary injunction hearing.
She didn't defy the constitution, she defied the SC. There is no mention of marriage in the Constitution. You should be more worried about Obama and almost ALL Dems violating the Constitution on a weekly, if not daily basis.
Is the 14th still part of the constitution?
She was acting as the state when she denied marriage licenses to couples. That would be the state denying privileges to citizens, and denying equal protection since some in the state were allowed the legal protections that come with marriage.
You don't get a jury trial for that regardless of the court related activity taking place.
It's really very simple.
Ok. Thanks.
I was under the assumption that since the injunction was ordered, and appealed, it was considered due process. I didn't realize that due process only applied to jury trials.
I was under the assumption that since the injunction was ordered, and appealed, it was considered due process. I didn't realize that due process only applied to jury trials.
Due process applies to everything.
The purpose of a trial is to make a finding of fact. With contempt, there is no fact in dispute. She admits she isn't following the judges order.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
