Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Just a week after the Supreme Court heard arguments over whether states must allow same sex marriage, the question may become moot. Indeed, the advancement of gay and lesbian rights from Stonewall on may be reversed as the result of a stunning legal challenge filed in federal court in Omaha.
Sylvia Driskell is suing, as a personal representative of God and Jesus, all the homosexuals and their allies. She wants to court to determine, once and for all, "Is Homosexuality a sin. Or not a sin." There's no word yet if the Holy Ghost will submit an amicus brief.
Besides the novel legal claim Driskell is advancing, the most noticeable thing about her complaint is that it's hand written. You can check it out yourself. While handwritten complaints aren't unusual for pro se litigants, one might expect the direct representative of the Almighty to have better access to a typewriter.
In terms of content, the complaint largely recites conservative Christian doctrine on homosexuality, citing Leviticus and Romans to support Driskell's view that gays and lesbians are sinners. She also throws in a few arguments regarding marriage for good measure. She twice cites Webster's dictionary, the highest dictionary in the land, so she may be a plain-language textualist.
However, it should be noted her version may be out of date. Merriam-Webster currently includes same sex partnerships in its definition of marriage.
In an interesting compositional strategy, Driskell attributes most of her complaint to one of three actors. Passages quoting from the Bible begin with "Plaintiff's God." The sections making religious and pseudo-legal arguments are ascribed to "Ambassador." More than a few sections are introduced with "Defendant's Homosexuals" and generally propose a sort of imagined counterpoint response to Driskell's arguments. For example, "in regards to paragraph 3 line 4, they, the homosexuals, say they have the right to be parents."
Will Driskell Win?
Obviously, the nation's homosexuals, acting and thinking as one, should move to dismiss the complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(b)(6). They may also consider a nice counterclaim. Since we're calling on the court to determine Christian doctrine, one might note that Driskell apparently represents only God and Jesus, supposedly as distinct legal entities. That could open her up to a claim of antitrinitarian heresy.
May 7, 2015: In a totally unexpected and shocking turn of events, this lawsuit was summarily dismissed by Judge John Gerrard.