this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2025
65 points (98.5% liked)

Independent News

111 readers
16 users here now

Welcome to the community for independent journalism, a place to post and engage with diverse, free news media from around the world.

The rundown:

  1. Posts should link to a current* article from a credible, independent news source. If there's a paywall, please put the official link in the URL box and add an archive link in the text body of your post. Blogs, editorials, listicles and reports are welcome.

  2. Post title should be the article headline or best fit. Add this tag if an account is needed for access: [sign-in required.]

  3. No misinformation. Provide sources when making substantial or potentially destructive claims.

  4. Be civil. Be respectful. Be cool. Instance rules apply.

  5. Tag NSFW and apply content warnings at your discretion.

*Independent journalism is generally free from government and corporate interests and is not controlled by a major media conglomerate. "Independence" is a gradient, so use your best judgement when posting.

The most reliable, most independent news organizations will have a solid fact-checking record, have diverse revenue streams, not post ads, conduct their own investigations, and use multiple, verified sources.

*Current depends on whether new, publicly available information has been released since the article has last been updated. When in doubt please add the published date to the title in a tag [like this.]

For a less serious news community, check out: !wildfeed@sh.itjust.works

Both communities were created with the goal of increasing media pluralism. Please share and contribute.

founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
 

The supreme court on Monday rejected a call to overturn its landmark decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.

The justices, without comment, turned away an appeal from Kim Davis, the former Kentucky court clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples after the high court’s 2015 ruling in Obergefell v Hodges.

Davis had been trying to get the court to overturn a lower-court order for her to pay $360,000 in damages and attorney’s fees to a couple denied a marriage license.

all 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 month ago

This isn't necessarily a rebuke of her position on gay marriage...only that they are letting the settlement decision against her, stand. She did violate their rights according to the law, so she must pay the damages.

[–] Arghblarg@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 month ago

.. for now. It probably just wasn't the 'right' case to let them weasel their way around to doing it.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Told ya they'd drop it with no comment. It's a weak case to begin with and not one they want to set precedent upon.

[–] Wren@lemmy.today 4 points 1 month ago

It was weak, but the fact it gained so much support is troubling. There are well funded interest groups who look for worthy contenders to puppet against the supreme court for these kinds of challenges.

Her lawyers are part of it: https://lc.org/