Legitimacy schmischmitimacy

Last week the super-legitimate Supreme Court--whose credibility is totally not in question--handed down its incredibly just decision that any business owner is now allowed to discriminate against anyone based on their firmly held religious beliefs no matter how misguided or flatly contradicted by the actual textual basis of said religion. 

"The steak? I don't think so. You'll have the tempeh sliders. I'm actually
a vegan, and your order conflicts with my deeply held whatevers."

-Some waiter

"It says that where? Where? You know, 
I'm getting real tired of this Cathy."

-Jesus

Cool. But it's come out now that the plaintiff, Lorie Smith, just made up the thing she was complaining about, so they're going to throw this out, right? Smith, who runs a company that makes websites for wedding, wanted to become a hero to shitty people everywhere by noting on her site that she won't make websites for the gays because the Bible famously forbids it. Huh? No, of course it doesn't, that's absurd, and Smith is just using her religion to shield her from accusations of homophobia, but whatever, here we are. Anyway, she was told she couldn't sue the state since no one actually asked her to make a gay wedding site.

Pictured: Lorie Smith of 303 Creative seen
here...uh...does anyone want to tell her
what the Bible says about getting tattoos? 

So rather than wait for the inevitable onslaught of gay betrotheds who want to force a Right-wing goon to craft a website for their special day, Lorie Smith just made one up. Or at least someone did, but they used an actual person's name and phone number to submit a request. The individual, called Stewart, was and is straight, already married, and did no such thing. Also, he himself is a web designer, so even if he did suddenly decide to leave his wife and marry a dude, he wouldn't need Lorie's dumb company anyway. But I guess nobody ever bothered to check any of this out until now. 

Above: That time Brett Kavanaugh
cried because people were mean to him.

And wouldn't you know it? Smith's case happened to go before the Supreme Court at a time when its ability to decide cases has been hopelessly skewed. Skewed by a rapidly diminishing Conservative minority who, feeling the cold fingers of irrelevancy around their throat, leveraged downtick races and re-drawn district lines to put a non-popularly elected President in a position to fill three seats. Two of which were stolen.

So a year ago, when John Roberts complained that people were questioning his Court's legitimacy, it's not just because we disagree with the decisions. We do, we absolutely do. But it's also because his Court's decisions are often wrong, strip Americans of hard-won liberties, and are being decided by people who lied about what is and isn't settled law and shouldn't on the Supreme Court to begin with. 

Oh, and didn't this guy take bribes? Like for years?