We begin today's roundup with
Renée Graham at The Boston Globe who calls Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis out for her refusal to issue same-sex marriage licenses:
Now Davis will play the martyr, tossed behind bars for putting the laws of God above those of mere mortals. Even after the Supreme Court ruled against her, Davis spent the week telling gay men and lesbians that in rejecting their request for a marriage license, she was acting “under God’s authority.”
Can God sue for defamation of character?
Wrong and strong, Davis’s actions are reminiscent of Alabama Governor George Wallace’s infamous “Stand in the Schoolhouse Door.” [...] Whatever her agenda, Davis has made a mockery of her position and religion. History has roundly denounced Wallace’s intolerance and intransigence at the door more than 50 years ago; it will be just as unforgiving of the uncivil civil servant of Rowan County, Kentucky.
Charles Pierce at Esquire:
Maybe she's just hanging her hat on Matthew 5: 33-37, where Jesus tells his followers not to swear oaths of any kind, but that puts her on the fightin' side of the Lord any time she takes an oath of office. Maybe she's confused. But if you're on the wrong side of theocracy from Antonin (Short Time) Scalia, you are a sheep who has left the fold far behind. [...] Or maybe she's just a self-important busybody taking her bigotry out for a walk on the news.
More on the day's top stories below the fold.
Noah Feldman at Bloomberg:
Whom you swear the oath by is different from what you swear to do. Officials in the U.S. definitively don’t swear to uphold God’s law. They swear to uphold the Constitution, which never mentions God at all. And they swear to uphold laws enacted under the Constitution -- which means laws that are in compliance with the establishment clause that prohibits any established or official religion.
That’s the main reason the framers didn’t include God in the oath of office. It would’ve contradicted the proposition in the Constitution that said no religious test would ever be required to hold office under the Constitution. [...] Given Davis’s statement of faith that it would violate her interpretation of God’s will to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple, she should quit her position as county clerk. Indeed, she must -- or she’d be living in a position of hypocritical sin.
Jill Lawrence:
There is plenty of precedent for exemptions based on faith or personal morality, of course. Conscientious objectors in wartime. Doctors who oppose abortion. And for over a year now, thanks to the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision, certain corporations run by religious families who don’t want to offer insurance coverage for contraception methods they consider tantamount to abortion.
Yet war is a matter of life and death, and for those who believe that life begins at conception, so is abortion. Gay marriage is different. Nobody is at risk of dying, not even a fertilized embryo. Beyond the happy couple, in fact, few—if any—are affected at all.
So it’s hard to see this Kentucky case as anything but religion injected into the public sphere, with intent to discriminate against adults who are pining to make the ultimate commitment to one another
Turning now to Donald Trump and signing of the GOP's "loyalty oath",
Chris Cillizza writes that Trump has the upper hand now:
In virtually every possible way, then, this was a major win for Trump. It tamps down what was becoming an increasingly tough issue for him to handle that would have been front and center at the next debate Sept. 16 -- while also making him look as strong as possible.
Trump also sets himself up as judge, jury and executioner when it comes to his oft-stated insistence that he just wants "to be treated like everyone else" by the national Republican party. Because "fair" -- especially when it comes to Trump -- is very much in the eye of the beholder, who's to say when and if his pledge becomes inoperable? Priebus as well as the rest of the GOP candidates stand at his mercy -- just the way Trump likes it.
Jim Newell at Slate also writes that Trump outsmarted the Republican party:
[T]here are no hard consequences for breaking this pledge. A candidate runs the risk of being labeled A Guy Who Breaks Pledges. But come now; if Trump were to run as an independent, he would simply come out and say that it was Priebus, the crooked establishment Republican Beltway insider fat cat, who reneged on the terms of the pledge by calling him a name, real or imagined. “I have no intention of changing my mind,” Trump said at his Thursday afternoon press conference in Trump Tower, following Priebus’ departure. And sure, that’s a statement of fact: Who has ever intended to change his mind? [...]
Priebus’ visit to Trump Tower further cements this reality television star’s transformation into a “real” presidential candidate who cannot be ignored or laughed off as the cycle deepens. And though Trump has signed this piece of paper saying he will and won’t do certain things next year, he has not signed any piece of paper requiring him to disavow the unorthodox nationalist, protectionist, tax increase–supporting agenda with which he’s carved his sizable lane. The Republican Party, however, has now committed itself to supporting this agenda, which goes against decades of its own dogma, if Trump is able to pull off the nomination. Most of today’s news has been framed as Trump signs pledge to support eventual nominee. Another way to look at it is Establishment Republican candidates pledge to support Donald Trump.
Take some time today and read this
in-depth Bloomberg profile by
Max Abelson of the Republican frontrunner:
Trump isn’t exactly self-made—he inherited substantial wealth from his father—but he is definitely self-invented. There’s no model in the political world for how he transformed himself into a campaign megastar without preparation, politeness, policy, or public service. To wander around inside Trump’s kingdom with his deputies, children, lenders, and former executives is to find a New York real estate mogul who stopped building Manhattan real estate and a global hotelier who doesn’t own most of his foreign hotels. Long before he was ignoring basic political rules, he was sailing far beyond the limits of his industry, steering an empire that’s as similar to most corporations as his run is to most presidential campaigns. In the same way that his campaign is post-politics, his company is post-business.
Trump is selling himself to America as the king of builders, a flawless dealmaker, and masterful manager. But he isn’t really any of those things. Trump has built few skyscrapers this century, stumbling twice when he’s tried, and struggled with an array of other projects. Meanwhile, his corporate leadership is a kind of teenager’s fantasy of adult office power. From his Trump Tower desk in Midtown Manhattan he controls the teensiest details, rejects hierarchy, and picks top deputies by following his own recipe for promotion.
And, on a final note, here's
Eugene Robinson's insightful take on Trump:
[B]y signing the pledge, Trump is essentially promising not to embark on an expensive and ultimately futile course of action. But here’s my question: How do Trump’s most fervent supporters react?
It’s true that Priebus came to Trump Tower for a pledge-signing ceremony, as if the party were a supplicant and Trump the grantor of favors. But much of Trump’s appeal comes from the fact that he doesn’t speak or act like a politician. He has gotten to where he is — the position of undisputed Republican front-runner — by ostentatiously refusing to play by the rules. He can’t possibly win by coming across as just like the other hopefuls, calculated and measured and boring.
On the other hand, if Trump does win the nomination, now even Jeb Bush has to support him .