{"id":2210,"date":"2023-07-13T19:49:51","date_gmt":"2023-07-14T02:49:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/?p=2210"},"modified":"2023-07-13T19:49:51","modified_gmt":"2023-07-14T02:49:51","slug":"why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/qs.gehenna.ynh.fr\/?p=2210","title":{"rendered":"Why did TST lose its federal abortion case in Texas?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Because The Satanic Temple is very bad at court cases.<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul id=\"introduction\" class=\"wp-block-list has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-0b478471b231171806f50e3526be99db\">\n<li><strong>Introduction<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/2#case-background\">Case Background<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/3#the-final-dismissal\">The Final Dismissal<\/a> (in detail)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/4#lucien-greaves-patreon\">The Satanic Temple&#8217;s response<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">We&#8217;ve said it before, and we will no doubt have many occasions to say it again in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-embed is-type-wp-embed is-provider-queer-satanic wp-block-embed-queer-satanic\"><div class=\"wp-block-embed__wrapper\">\n<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"4lnNY3m7rF\"><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/the-satanic-temple-is-very-bad-at-court-cases\/\">The Satanic Temple is very bad at court cases<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\" sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" style=\"position: absolute; visibility: hidden;\" title=\"&#8220;The Satanic Temple is very bad at court cases&#8221; &#8212; Queer Satanic\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/the-satanic-temple-is-very-bad-at-court-cases\/embed\/#?secret=qI9JSkrWue#?secret=4lnNY3m7rF\" data-secret=\"4lnNY3m7rF\" width=\"500\" height=\"282\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\"><\/iframe>\n<\/div><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<div data-wp-interactive=\"core\/file\" class=\"wp-block-file\"><object data-wp-bind--hidden=\"!state.hasPdfPreview\" hidden class=\"wp-block-file__embed\" data=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/final-amended-complaint-39.pdf\" type=\"application\/pdf\" style=\"width:100%;height:600px\" aria-label=\"Embed of final-amended-complaint-39.\"><\/object><a id=\"wp-block-file--media-38a44e3f-ef2a-4fe1-a9f3-1e06fa50f4d2\" href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/final-amended-complaint-39.pdf\">final-amended-complaint-39<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/final-amended-complaint-39.pdf\" class=\"wp-block-file__button wp-element-button\" download aria-describedby=\"wp-block-file--media-38a44e3f-ef2a-4fe1-a9f3-1e06fa50f4d2\">Download<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This article goes through the judge&#8217;s opinion in some depth to show why that judge is <em>not<\/em> a &#8220;doddering old fool&#8221;, as <a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20230707194733\/https:\/\/www.patreon.com\/posts\/legal-update-85703577\">TST&#8217;s owner claimed<\/a> in response to the judgment against them, but rather how The Satanic Temple fails its donors and supporters again and again with sloppy or intentionally threadbare legal work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If you&#8217;re looking for a shorter explanation, &#8220;<strong>The Satanic Temple is malicious but also incredibly incompetent<\/strong>&#8221; is sufficient in general for most things \u2014 but keep in mind that that&#8217;s doubly true in a space with an eventual requirement of evidence for claims, with standards of basic decorum, and of course where &#8220;technicalities&#8221; require one to actually know and cite the law accurately to succeed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Litigation is supposed to be where TST excels, after all \u2014 the arena on which so much of TST&#8217;s mythical efficacy rests \u2014 and their supposed proficiency is supposed to justify hundreds of grand in unaccounted charitable donations to TST every year from around the country just to facilitate their ability to bring suits. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">But when you actually look behind the curtain, and examine their courtroom performance as it actually exists on record and not merely in their childish press releases, TST comes off less as a group of canny but unorthodox legal strategists, and <strong>more as a clown car of snake oil salesmen with an at best hypothetical grasp on the law as it exists<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full is-resized\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-31.png\" alt=\"Lucien Greaves as a snake oil salesman\" class=\"wp-image-2252\" style=\"width:610px;height:462px\"\/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">&#8220;As a federally-recognized religion, The Satanic Temple utilizes Religious Freedom Restoration Acts and the Hobby Lobby precedent to protect its members from unnecessary abortion regulations that inhibit their religious practices&#8230;&#8221;<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">But even that falls a bit short here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-29.png\" alt=\"Matt Kezhaya explaining why every single judge and opposing counsel in the country is incompetent, corrupt, and biased against him and The Satanic Temple specifically (2022, colorized)\" class=\"wp-image-2245\"\/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">What began as <em>The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. Hellerstedt<\/em> (also known as \u201cAnn Doe I\u201d or the \u201csatanic abortion loophole\u201d case) ends with TST getting roasted for being sloppy and lazy in its filings but raising hundreds of thousands of dollars along the way.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If you remember back to September 2021 or much of 2022, The Satanic Temple was being held by popular press as a beacon for religious liberty challenged to abortion and \u201cthe last best hope\u201d for abortion access. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-32.png\" alt=\"Salon article: Why Satanists may be the last, best hope to save abortion rights in Texas\nThe &quot;nontheistic&quot; organization joins the fray with a last-ditch legal maneuver to save abortion rights in Texas\nBy BRETT BACHMAN\nPUBLISHED SEPTEMBER 4, 2021 12:37PM (EDT)\" class=\"wp-image-2259\"\/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\"><em><a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20210904222545\/https:\/\/www.salon.com\/2021\/09\/04\/why-satanists-may-be-the-last-best-hope-to-save-abortion-rights-in-texas\/\">Salon headline<\/a> from Sep. 4, 2021: &#8220;Why Satanists may be the last, best hope to save abortion rights in Texas: The &#8216;nontheistic&#8217; organization joins the fray with a last-ditch legal maneuver to save abortion rights in Texas&#8221;<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">There will be no follow up from those same reporters or outlets.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">That lack of followup consistently works in the Temple&#8217;s favor, allowing it to launder a reputation as cheeky legal geniuses by word of mouth and sheer inertia. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Let&#8217;s lift the curtain and show what actually happened, as we understand it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center has-medium-font-size wp-block-paragraph\">[1]<a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/2\">[2]<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/3\">[3]<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/4\">[4]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--nextpage-->\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading alignwide\" id=\"case-background\">Case Background<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-da6352060c0811c6312d272001754ccd\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/#introduction\">Introduction<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Case Background<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/3#the-final-dismissal\">The Final Dismissal<\/a> (in detail)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/4#lucien-greaves-patreon\">The Satanic Temple&#8217;s response<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The initial suit is allegedly intended as a challenge to Texas\u2019 then-current abortion regulations at the time under <a href=\"https:\/\/codes.findlaw.com\/tx\/health-and-safety-code\/health-safety-sect-171-012.html\">Texas Health and Safety Code 171.012<\/a>. In this case, the regulations being challenged are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The requirement for an abortion seeker to have a sonogram prior to getting an abortion;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The requirement for that sonogram to then be explained to the abortion seeker, \u201cincluding a medical description of the dimensions of the embryo or fetus, the presence of cardiac activity, and the presence of external members and internal organs\u201d<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The requirement for an abortion seeker to also wait 24 hours between receiving this sonogram and undergoing the abortion itself<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">These and similar regulations are known as TRAP laws (targeted restrictions on abortion providers), which are intended to prevent abortions by making the process for getting them as burdensome as possible, without any individual regulation being able to be challenged as an \u201cundue burden\u201d to the then-constitutional right to an abortion. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">For a breakdown of how TRAP laws function, see Planned Parenthood\u2019s informer <a href=\"https:\/\/www.plannedparenthoodaction.org\/issues\/abortion\/types-attacks\/trap-laws\">here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">For a further breakdown of how the Supreme Court ruling Planned Parenthood vs. Casey helped make TRAP laws possible, see this explainer from <a href=\"https:\/\/www.npr.org\/2022\/05\/06\/1096885897\/roe-established-abortion-rights-20-years-later-casey-paved-the-way-for-restricti\">NPR<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On Feb. 5, 2021, The Satanic Temple filed a complaint against the Texas Department of State Health Services, and its executive commissioner John Hellerstedt, claiming that these regulations interfere with its\u2019 members ability to conduct the Satanic Abortion Ritual. The Satanic Abortion Ritual is comprised of both what we might call \u201ctraditional\u201d ritual elements, such as meditation and verbal recitation of certain beliefs, and the abortion itself. In addition to representing itself on the idea that it is directly harmed by being in ideological opposition to the TRAP laws, TST also represented a pregnant TST member introduced pseudonymously as Ann Doe, who had been scheduled to have an abortion on Feb. 6, 2021 \u2013 the day after this complaint was filed \u2013 and who wished to utilize the Satanic Abortion Ritual at the same time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Per TST\u2019s prayer for relief, the initial complaint is intended to achieve two things. Firstly, TST attempted to obtain temporary injunctive relief exempting Ann Doe from being required to abide by the aforementioned TRAP laws \u2013 a court order immediately allowing Doe to undergo her scheduled abortion the following day, without being required to have a sonogram, wait 24 hours, or anything else, on the premise that these regulations interfere with Doe\u2019s exercise of her religious beliefs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Secondly, and more broadly, the initial complaint was intended to form the basis of a permanent religious exemption from Texas\u2019 abortion regulations for any other TST members in the future (described in the complaint as \u201cTST\u2019s similarly situated members\u201d). Theoretically, this would have been achieved by two additional permanent injunctions \u2013 one barring the enforcement of the regulations as unconstitutional, and another one mandating the creation of new regulations that accommodate the Satanic Abortion Ritual.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In its <a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/docket\/59182019\/1\/the-satanic-temple-inc-v-hellerstedt\/\">initial suit<\/a>, TST alleged the following liabilities:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>A hybrid violation of the First Amendment\u2019s Free Speech and Free Exercise clauses by obstructing the religious speech contained in the Satanic Abortion Ritual<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A violation of the Equal Protection Clause, on the premise that requiring abortion seekers to hear a particular \u201cnarrative\u201d explanation of a sonogram unfairly discriminated against people interested in conducting the Satanic Abortion Ritual<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A violation of <em>Casey<\/em> as described above, on the premise that requiring a sonogram constitutes an unconstitutional \u201cundue burden\u201d on Ann Doe<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A violation of Texas\u2019 Religious Freedom Restoration Act on the premise that all of these regulations constitute a \u201csubstantial interference\u201d with the free exercise of religion of both Doe and \u201cTST\u2019s similarly situated members\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Over the next several months, the lawsuit unfolds in a way that we, as laymen, would roughly describe as \u201cTST going out of its way to trip over its own feet repeatedly while the court looks on patiently waiting for TST to get its shit together.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">As mentioned above, the initial complaint was filed on Feb. 5 and detailed the need for a temporary injunction in anticipation of Ann Doe\u2019s scheduled abortion on Feb. 6. The injunction request was <a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/docket\/59182019\/9\/the-satanic-temple-inc-v-hellerstedt\/\">denied<\/a> the next day, because the judge determined that TST had made no good faith attempt to serve the complaint through any informal means (such as email); this informal service would be the minimum required to plausibly suggest an actual emergency was ongoing or imminent. Moreover, by filing this complaint the day before the scheduled abortion, TST was determined to essentially have attempted to circumvent the defendants\u2019 own right to due process, namely the right to respond and be heard in kind.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Because Doe had apparently successfully undergone the abortion on Feb. 6, TST could no longer demand injunctive relief in its complaint barring enforcement of Texas\u2019 TRAP laws for Ann Doe in particular, and had to withdraw that demand. TST was granted leave to file an amended complaint a week later, on Feb. 12.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">TST\u2019s choice of defendants changes repeatedly and dramatically over this time as well. TST\u2019s initial complaint targets both the Texas Department of State Health Services (TDSHS), and its executive commissioner at the time, John Hellerstedt, MD, ostensibly for being the parties responsible for enforcing the regulations being challenged. However, TST also infamously opted to include naming Planned Parenthood as a defendant as well, with the justification that their inclusion was supposedly necessary in order for PP to be able to utilize the hypothetically forthcoming injunction, and allow Doe to circumvent the TRAP laws at their facility. But once that injunction had been denied, there was no remaining justification for PP to remain a party, and they were removed as a defendant in the subsequent amended complaints.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Between Feb. 24 and May 4 2021, both parties are engaged in what seems to be an extended period of pretrial conferences \u2013 this is a standard procedure that is intended to help all parties, including the judge, clarify what issues are actually in dispute, and to see if other resolutions (like arbitration\/mediation) could be available instead. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Without being able to tell why TST couldn\u2019t have demanded or engaged in this discussion <em>before<\/em> launching a doomed injunction request with less than 24 hours\u2019 advance notice, we\u2019d like to focus on the other outcomes of this conference period instead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Not only does TST emerge with leave to amend its complaint again afterward \u2013 leave to file a third complaint \u2013 but when that complaint is finally <a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/docket\/59182019\/26\/the-satanic-temple-inc-v-hellerstedt\/\">filed on May 7<\/a>, the defendants are completely different. Going forward, TST is now suing the Texas Health and Human Services Commission, and its executive commissioner, Cecile Young, on the premise that these parties, <em>not<\/em> the TDSHS or Hellerstedt, are actually the ones responsible for enforcing the regulations at stake. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Again, it\u2019s not clear why TST couldn\u2019t have verified that they were targeting the right parties back in February when they were drafting the initial complaint. But we also know from firsthand experience that TST is nothing if not shy about the prospect of suing unrelated people as human shields if that\u2019s what TST thinks is practical for recovering \u201cdamages.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On <a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/docket\/59182019\/33\/the-satanic-temple-inc-v-hellerstedt\/\">August 6, 2021<\/a>, TST withdrew its Equal Protection Clause complaint, and also did not contest the dismissal of the TRFRA claim against THHSC for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Because the TRFRA claim was the only allegation against THHSC here, THHSC is also subsequently removed as a defendant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On December 20, 2021, TST\u2019s amended complaint was <a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/docket\/59182019\/34\/the-satanic-temple-inc-v-hellerstedt\/\">dismissed without prejudice<\/a>, on the basis that the impending <em>Dobbs<\/em> decision would weigh directly on the merits of the remaining allegations. Moreover, the judge stayed the case until after <em>Dobbs<\/em>, whereupon TST would be allowed to amend its argument yet again, and would be expected to take into account any changes in law that had transpired at the same time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On August 22, 2022, TST filed its final amended complaint, which is noteworthy for being drastically less detailed than the previous complaints despite it being the only one being evaluated. Whereas the previous complaints are fully 18+ pages of detail comprising the standard (if arguably insufficient) factual background, legal arguments, and liability claims, TST\u2019s post-Dobbs complaint is a sparse 7 pages of blunt assertions and demands in a list of bullet points with none of the factual or legal background provided previously.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This is the complaint that the final ruling was made upon:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div data-wp-interactive=\"core\/file\" class=\"wp-block-file\"><object data-wp-bind--hidden=\"!state.hasPdfPreview\" hidden class=\"wp-block-file__embed\" data=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/final-amended-complaint-39.pdf\" type=\"application\/pdf\" style=\"width:100%;height:600px\" aria-label=\"Embed of final-amended-complaint-39.\"><\/object><a id=\"wp-block-file--media-38a44e3f-ef2a-4fe1-a9f3-1e06fa50f4d2\" href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/final-amended-complaint-39.pdf\">final-amended-complaint-39<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/final-amended-complaint-39.pdf\" class=\"wp-block-file__button wp-element-button\" download aria-describedby=\"wp-block-file--media-38a44e3f-ef2a-4fe1-a9f3-1e06fa50f4d2\">Download<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">At the same time, TST also filed an <a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/docket\/59182019\/40\/the-satanic-temple-inc-v-hellerstedt\/\">equally sparse motion<\/a> for a temporary injunction demanding Young be barred from enforcing any abortion restrictions against anyone in The Satanic Temple. This is similarly noteworthy not just for its brevity, but for fully half of its text being comprised bizarrely of what appears to be a five-act play. This motion was <a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/docket\/59182019\/42\/the-satanic-temple-inc-v-hellerstedt\/\">denied<\/a> about two weeks later, on Sept. 7, for not even attempting to meet the required elements of an injunction request. TST filed a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/docket\/59182019\/43\/the-satanic-temple-inc-v-hellerstedt\/\">notice of appeal<\/a> for this motion in particular, and while it\u2019s out of scope for this article, you can find the docket for that <a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/docket\/66693942\/satanic-temple-v-tx-hlth-and-human-svc\/\">here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Being the only remaining defendant at this point, Young filed her motion to dismiss TST\u2019s complaint as normal. TST not only objected, but also attempted to strike her motion from the record for being behind schedule. This was ultimately <a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/docket\/59182019\/58\/the-satanic-temple-inc-v-hellerstedt\/\">denied on Nov. 14, 2022<\/a>, with the judge citing a tradition of the court\u2019s relative lenience on missing early deadlines when parties are otherwise actively engaged with litigation overall.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Up to this point, TST\u2019s lead counsel, Matt Kezhaya, had been allowed to represent TST in this case <em>pro hac vice<\/em> \u2013 which is to say, outside the states he is licensed to practice in. <em>Pro hac vice<\/em> status is a privilege granted by the court on the assumption that the lawyer will participate in proceedings in good faith. However, by now, Kezhaya had been sanctioned twice in other federal courts around the country for abusive and unethical legal practice specifically on behalf of TST, as well as indulging in a litany of other intemperate behavior, which we have discussed in some detail <a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/the-satanic-temple-is-very-bad-at-court-cases\/#matthew-kezhaya\">here<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On Nov. 15 2022, the court here took notice of that in conjunction with his behavior in this case, and demanded that Kezhaya explain those sanctions and show cause as to why his <em>pro hac vice <\/em>status in this case shouldn\u2019t be revoked. After receiving the responses, the court delivered an <a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/docket\/59182019\/65\/the-satanic-temple-inc-v-hellerstedt\/\">admonishment<\/a> to Kezhaya on Jan. 12, 2023, with a final warning against further malicious or frivolous filings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The brief history above makes it appear quite doubtful that Attorney Kezhaya is capable of conforming his conduct to acceptable practice in federal court. His explanations as to the two sanctions entered against him also fail to convince that they weren\u2019t justified. But he has adequately explained that the sanctions don\u2019t (at least at this juncture) warrant revocation of his admission pro hac vice. As such, he may continue as counsel in this litigation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Attorney Kezhaya is ADMONISHED that his conduct will be scrutinized for propriety, and that frivolous and\/or malicious filings will be stricken or summarily denied. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">He is further ADMONISHED to conform his conduct and practice to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (including Rule 11), the Local Rules of the Southern District of Texas, this Court\u2019s individual procedures (including Attachment 2, with respect to guidelines for professional conduct), and all pertinent ethical rules.<\/p>\n<cite><a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/docket\/59182019\/65\/the-satanic-temple-inc-v-hellerstedt\/\">The Satanic Temple vs. Hellerstedt, #65<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On July 3, 2023, TST\u2019s final amended complaint against Cecile Young was dismissed. What follows is our own reading of that dismissal, and why we think it paints a clear and damning picture as to why The Satanic Temple is not just incapable of protecting anyone\u2019s religious freedom, but fundamentally disinterested in the concept, and must be regarded as an active threat to the earnest struggle for reproductive justice and religious freedom everywhere.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center has-medium-font-size wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/\">[1]<\/a>[2]<a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/3\">[3]<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/4\">[4]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--nextpage-->\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading alignwide\" id=\"the-final-dismissal\">The Satanic Temple, Inc. vs. Hellerstedt &#8211; The Final Dismissal<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-e76c956257a7fe253ff0f68167c6d258\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/#introduction\">Introduction<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/2#case-background\">Case Background<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>The Final Dismissal (in detail)<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/4#lucien-greaves-patreon\">The Satanic Temple&#8217;s response<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It&#8217;s absolutely worth reading this dismissal \u2014 it&#8217;s not just a roast and a fun read for its own sake, but more importantly it&#8217;s a terrific tear down of why TST cannot be trusted with anyone&#8217;s abortion rights, and goes out of its way to disqualify itself on a fundamental level.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">That&#8217;s why we&#8217;ll be going through it in some detail here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/docket\/59182019\/the-satanic-temple-inc-v-hellerstedt\/\">The Satanic Temple, Inc.<em>&nbsp;v.&nbsp;<\/em>Hellerstedt full docket<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<div data-wp-interactive=\"core\/file\" class=\"wp-block-file\"><object data-wp-bind--hidden=\"!state.hasPdfPreview\" hidden class=\"wp-block-file__embed\" data=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/Satanic-Temple-v-Hellerstedt-Order-Document-67-gov.uscourts.txsd_.1813841.67.0.pdf\" type=\"application\/pdf\" style=\"width:100%;height:600px\" aria-label=\"Embed of Order\u00a0\u2014\u00a0Document #67.\"><\/object><a id=\"wp-block-file--media-3f0122ed-e11b-4844-86ca-1a92b5d2fe66\" href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/Satanic-Temple-v-Hellerstedt-Order-Document-67-gov.uscourts.txsd_.1813841.67.0.pdf\">Order&nbsp;\u2014&nbsp;Document #67<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/Satanic-Temple-v-Hellerstedt-Order-Document-67-gov.uscourts.txsd_.1813841.67.0.pdf\" class=\"wp-block-file__button wp-element-button\" download aria-describedby=\"wp-block-file--media-3f0122ed-e11b-4844-86ca-1a92b5d2fe66\">Download<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-ac25c7ea1377a324a17e8b1b1eb1d63c is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-primary-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\">Plaintiffs here are The Satanic Temple and one of its members, identified as Ann Doe. They filed this suit challenging the abortion laws of Texas before the Supreme Court issued its decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women\u2019s Health, 142 S Ct 2228 (2022). After Dobbs, they sought and were granted leave to amend their complaint for the third<br>time. <strong>The operative complaint asserts claims under the religion and speech clauses of the First Amendment. Dkt 39. It now differs substantially from prior versions in that it contains almost no factual detail and makes broad, vague allegations without even identifying the laws being challenged.<\/strong> See Dkts 1, 12 &amp; 26.<br><br>Defendant Cecile Young is Executive Commissioner of the Texas Health and Human Services Commission. Pending is her motion to dismiss the third amended complaint. Dkt 46. She argues that (i) Plaintiffs lack standing to sue, (ii) she is immune to suit, and (iii) the third amended complaint fails to state a claim.<br><br>The motion is granted. The complaint lacks sufficient factual allegations either to support Plaintiffs\u2019 standing or to overcome Young\u2019s immunity to suit. Further attempt at repleading won\u2019t be allowed.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">For a religion that constantly extols the value of beliefs (and actions) following evidence, TST is really bad at providing supporting evidence for its claims, including justification for why they&#8217;re bringing action against a particular person.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This happens in suit after suit.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-17.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-2212\"\/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-4c45bcce69740d1f9a99c96b8d1c2c15 is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-primary-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\">1. Background<br><strong>The third amended complaint is spare and unusually cryptic<\/strong>. For instance, The Satanic Temple is alleged to be \u201ca religion.\u201d Dkt 39 at \u00b6 4. But what its belief structure entails and how Texas law was applied against it isn\u2019t meaningfully explained. <strong>Also unstated is how those laws impacted Ann Doe herself, who is included in the caption, but about whom nothing more is said.<\/strong><br><br>Similarly obscure is the nature of Plaintiffs\u2019 action against Defendant Cecile Young. Given oblique reference to her title in the caption, Young is presumably named in her official capacity as the Executive Commissioner of the Texas Health and Human Services Commission. Little else is said about her. <strong>It\u2019s certainly not clear what she\u2019s allegedly done, or when, how, or to whom she did it.<\/strong><br><br>The third amended complaint overall devotes only five pages to the narrative and causes of action. Much is left to conjecture.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This is familiar territory for us personally, having <a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/to-shame-the-devil-satanic-temples-lawsuit-against-ex-members-fails-again\/\">beaten the Temple&#8217;s abusive SLAPP litigation in federal court<\/a> on the basis that TST failed to establish as plausible the court&#8217;s jurisdiction over the few allegations they even bothered to frame. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-embed is-type-wp-embed is-provider-queer-satanic wp-block-embed-queer-satanic\"><div class=\"wp-block-embed__wrapper\">\n<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"ifhVCj2rgG\"><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wait-why-is-the-satanic-temple-still-suing-you\/\">Wait, why is The Satanic Temple (still) suing you?<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\" sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" style=\"position: absolute; visibility: hidden;\" title=\"&#8220;Wait, why is The Satanic Temple (still) suing you?&#8221; &#8212; Queer Satanic\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wait-why-is-the-satanic-temple-still-suing-you\/embed\/#?secret=9GrDbbfd9h#?secret=ifhVCj2rgG\" data-secret=\"ifhVCj2rgG\" width=\"500\" height=\"282\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\"><\/iframe>\n<\/div><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Reminder: jurisdiction is so fundamental to the concept of due process that a plaintiff has to actively establish it before anything else. Hell, a judge has the power to <a href=\"https:\/\/constitution.congress.gov\/browse\/essay\/artIII-S2-C1-6-1\/ALDE_00012992\/#ALDF_00016941\">proactively raise the matter of jurisdiction<\/a> if it becomes lost or otherwise unclear at any point, that&#8217;s how big a deal it is. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-e59ab679ed1ab65f0d8e52c1fc907aae is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-primary-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\">Petitioner points out that this case presents questions of fundamental national importance calling for final resolution by this Court. But the importance of an issue should not distort the principles that control the exercise of our jurisdiction.<\/p>\n<cite>&nbsp;<a href=\"http:\/\/cdn.loc.gov\/service\/ll\/usrep\/usrep534\/usrep534103\/usrep534103.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Mineta,&nbsp;534 U.S. 103, 110 (2001)<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">So when TST apologists try to obfuscate their defeats as having been due to &#8220;technicalities&#8221; rather than what they really are, keep in mind what actually happened: TST got caught out on its multilateral ignorance and contempt for the rule of law.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-18.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-2213\"\/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-fa2b94d964048e6e448f06f79fba1bd1 is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-primary-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\">2. Standing<br>Federal courts are ones of limited jurisdiction. Howery v Allstate Insurance Co, 243 F3d 912, 916 (5th Cir 2001). Subject-matter jurisdiction is thus inherently a threshold matter. Steel Co v Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 US 83, 94\u201395 (1998). <strong>A decision to hear a case that\u2019s beyond the subject-matter jurisdiction of a federal court isn\u2019t a \u201cmere technical violation,\u201d but is instead \u201can unconstitutional usurpation\u201d of power.<\/strong> Charles Alan Wright and Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure \u00a7 3522 (West 3d ed April 2022 update).<br><br>Dismissal is appropriate \u201cwhen the court lacks the statutory or constitutional power to adjudicate the claim.\u201d In re Federal Emergency Management Agency Trailer Formaldehyde Products Liability Litigation, 668 F3d 281, 286 (5th Cir 2012). Rule 12(b)(1) permits a defendant to seek such dismissal. Once put at issue, the party asserting jurisdiction has the burden to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that it properly exists. New Orleans &amp; Gulf Coast Railway Co v Barrois, 533 F3d 321, 327 (5th Cir  2008). <strong>Indeed, a presumption against subject-matter jurisdiction \u201cmust be rebutted by the party bringing an action to federal court.\u201d<\/strong> Coury v Prot, 85 F3d 244, 248 (5th Cir 1996).<br><br>This includes objection to the standing of the plaintiff<br>to assert a claim.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Satanic Temple fails to show standing here in multiple ways with regards to their &#8220;Ann Doe&#8221; \u2014 TST doesn&#8217;t show any plausible injury here, doesn&#8217;t show a source of that injury, doesn&#8217;t connect that source to Cecile Young, and doesn&#8217;t show why what the Temple <em>does<\/em> want from Young would cure that injury.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-19.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-2214\"\/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-e645f3ff28ee4409c3ef15ed4c4d76c2 is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-primary-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>As to Ann Doe<\/em>, the third amended complaint fails to allege any facts about her or her circumstances. Indeed, it doesn\u2019t even mention her in the section purporting to describe the parties to the action.<\/strong> See Dkt 39 at \u00b6\u00b6 4\u20139. <strong>With no facts about her pleaded, no injury-in-fact is plausibly alleged. <\/strong>Even were injury assumed, traceability of any such injury is a mystery because no particular action against her by Young is alleged. <strong>Yet even assuming a traceable injury, nothing suggests redressability.<\/strong> The only relief requested against Young is that she be ordered \u201cto recognize a religious exemption for abortion.\u201d Dkt 39 at 6. But the motion argues\u2014on a point to which Plaintiffs make no response\u2014that \u201cthe physicians who perform abortions in Texas will still be subject to criminal prosecution,\u201d with Young having \u201cno connection to or control over any of the district attorneys or other prosecutors throughout Texas.\u201d Dkt 46 at 10\u201311, citing Tex Health &amp; Safety Code \u00a7 170A.001 et seq.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">We are but humble shitposters, but we have to ask: what good does it do anyone, exactly, to extract a (false) recognition of a religious abortion exemption from someone who has no power to convert that recognition into the prevention of state violence against abortion seekers?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">TST loves its petulant shell games with names. It knowingly registers false information with secretaries of state around the country to feed its bloated persecution complex. That phony mystique works against TST once more, while again showcasing their contempt for the issues at stake.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-20.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-2215\"\/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-f7f59d43dee72065c9c822c6ff2d9f4f is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-primary-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\"><em>As to The Satanic Temple<\/em>, the third amended complaint makes no attempt at showing the entity\u2019s own potential for individual standing. Nothing suggests that the unspecified religious statutes are directed at it. See Dkt 39 at \u00b6\u00b6 15\u201316. Nor does the third amended complaint state that The Satanic Temple is itself prohibited from doing any particular thing. Instead, it asserts only that \u201cthe congregants tried to engage in the ritual\u201d but were \u201cunsuccessful.\u201d See id at \u00b6\u00b6 25 &amp; 27. This serves only to focus inquiry on the circumstances of individual members. And <strong>for an association to have standing to sue on behalf of its members, it must show that \u201cits members would otherwise have standing to sue in their own right, the interests at stake are germane to the organization\u2019s purpose, and neither the claim asserted nor the relief requested requires the participation of individual members in the lawsuit.\u201d<\/strong> Friends of the Earth Inc v Laidlaw environmental Services (TOC) Inc, 528 US 167, 181 (2000).<strong> At best, the third amended complaint describes in bare terms the beliefs of adherents, without in any way alleging facts about what happened to any one of them. And given the private, medical nature of the underlying subject matter, it seems likely that the participation of individual members will be necessary in some respects. At the very least, The Satanic Temple hasn\u2019t met its burden to muster proof in that regard.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Final procedural note on standing: not only are the allegations made by The Satanic Temple factually insufficient, but TST actively chose not to include the documentation of facts that might have made the difference! <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">What year in law school do they cover &#8220;cite your fucking sources&#8221;? <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Anyone?<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-21.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-2216\"\/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-17727c9bfd3432b2c3d260f39cdd7642 is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-primary-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>It\u2019s also inappropriate to consider facts contained in other documents on the record. Such items weren\u2019t even pleaded as allegations in the first place<\/strong>. It was thus incumbent on Plaintiffs to include any such facts in their third amended complaint or, at the very least, to incorporate them by reference. They did no such thing. Instead, they allege plainly insufficient facts to support standing as to both Ann Doe and The Satanic Temple.<br><br><strong>Simply put, by failing to make anything beyond conclusory allegations in their third amended complaint, Plaintiffs\u2019 pleading reads as one asserting nothing more than a \u201cgeneralized grievance\u201d on behalf of Plaintiffs against the abortion laws of Texas<\/strong>. See Lujan, 504 US at 575. <strong>That\u2019s insufficient to support standing. Dismissal will be entered on this basis.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The next section covers sovereign immunity. Basically, state officials are immune from being sued over their execution of state policy and are treated as interchangeable with the state itself. However, an exception <em>can<\/em> apply if the plaintiff is able to show why a particular official is related to the enforcement of the law being challenged. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This is to say that once again, specificity matters. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-large-font-size wp-block-paragraph\">GUESS WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-22.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-2217\"\/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-1f30ec54637ada0b34793eff4e56a89a is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-primary-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\">3. Sovereign immunity<br>Briefing of the motion to dismiss proceeds on the mistaken assumption that the Texas Health and Human Services Commission has itself been named in the third amended complaint. See Dkt 46 at 12\u201314. It hasn\u2019t. But had it been, sovereign immunity would surely pertain and require dismissal. The Commission is a state agency. For example, see Tex Govt Code \u00a7 531.021(a); Simmons v Smith, 774 F Appx 228, 229 (5th Cir 2019). And the Fifth Circuit holds, \u201cState agencies are entitled to Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity.\u201d City of Austin v Paxton, 943 F3d 993, 1003 (5th Cir 2019).<br><br>Instead, only Cecile Young is named, identified in the caption in her official capacity as the Executive Commissioner. See Dkt 39 at 1. Sovereign immunity extends to her actions in that regard insofar as suits against state officials in their official capacities are treated as suits against the state. Russell v Jones, 49 F4th 507, 513 (5th Cir 2022). Even so, the Supreme Court long ago recognized a limited exception to sovereign immunity, in Ex parte Young, 209 US 123 (1908), that permits \u201csuits for prospective injunctive relief against state officials acting in violation of federal law.\u201d Frew ex rel Frew v Hawkins, 540 US 431, 437 (2004). <strong>For the exception to apply, the state official must have \u201csome connection\u201d to enforcement of the challenged statute\u2014meaning that he or she must have \u201cthe particular duty to enforce the statute in question and a demonstrated willingness to exercise that duty.\u201d<\/strong> Morris v Livingston, 739 F3d 740, 746 (5th Cir 2014) (citation omitted).<br><br><strong>Young argues that the third amended complaint is so devoid of explanation that Plaintiffs fail to demonstrate that any exception to sovereign immunity applies.<\/strong> Dkt 46 at 12\u201314. <strong>Plaintiffs don\u2019t respond to this argument in any meaningful way. They simply (and flatly) cite Ex parte Young and assert liability.<\/strong> See Dkt 52 at 7. <strong>But it isn\u2019t up to this Court to ponder what specific argument this entails, to theorize what the best argument in this regard might be, or to imagine how they might be connected to facts that haven\u2019t been pleaded.<\/strong><br><br><strong>Failure to brief a point forfeits opposition to that point.<\/strong> See Henderson v Wells Fargo Bank NA, 974 F Supp 2d 993, 1017 (ND Tex 2013), citing Black v North Panola School District, 461 F3d 584, 588 n 1 (5th Cir 2006). <strong>Action against Young will be dismissed on this basis.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If you guessed &#8220;TST would invoke the existence of the exception and then refuse to substantiate it, pretending that mentioning the exception ought be the same as an argument that that exception applies here,&#8221; give yourself a damn cookie.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center wp-block-paragraph\">&#8220;You can&#8217;t just say &#8216;perchance&#8217; &#8221; <br>&#8211; the Judge, probably<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">TST has been described in other suits as having a comic-book understanding of how information and power flow through local government, and that&#8217;s on full display here. <\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-23.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-2218\"\/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-ee61e0689efc8e4636fd10ed01c9608c is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-primary-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>But dismissal is also appropriate even apart from forfeiture. <\/strong>Challenge under Rule 12(b)(1) is the appropriate means by which to assert immunity to suit. See Warnock v Pecos County, 88 F3d 341, 343 (5th Cir 1996). The standards stated as to standing thus pertain equally here. <strong>And as above, the pleading in the third amended complaint is so bare that it cannot hope to establish the applicability of the Ex parte Young exception. What\u2019s being challenged? No particular statute is even cited, with reference instead only to unspecified \u201creligious statutes\u201d that \u201clegislators enacted\u201d and \u201cYoung enforced.\u201d<\/strong> Id at \u00b6\u00b6 15 &amp; 26. <strong>How is Young involved in their enforcement, and how, when, why, and in what way did she apply them to Plaintiffs? Unknown. The unelaborated allegations are solely that she was \u201cauthorized . . . to interfere with the ritual,\u201d \u201cenforced the religious statutes,\u201d and \u201cstopped the ritual.\u201d<\/strong> Id at \u00b6\u00b6 24, 26 &amp; 28.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">&#8220;She interfered with the ritual (source: trust me, bro).&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Final note on sovereign immunity, basically a TLDR of how badly TST failed to argue against it. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Again: naming defendants who are barely related to the cause of action, using them as hostages for siege warfare litigation, and refusing to elaborate is a bad strategy, mkay?<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-24.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-2219\"\/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-e2e934b80991bb5837207a969626b9cf is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-primary-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\">This concern on immunity overlaps somewhat with argument that the third amended complaint fails to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6). For example, see Bell Atlantic Corp v Twombly, 550 US 544, 570 (2007); Ashcroft v Iqbal, 556 US 662, 678 (2009). But overcoming assertion of sovereign immunity is itself subject to the mandate of Rule 8(a)(2) requiring \u201ca short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.\u201d The operative complaint cites Ex parte Young and recognizes it must be met in both causes of action. See Dkt 39 at \u00b6\u00b6 33 &amp; 44.<strong> But Young\u2019s immunity with respect to enforcement of restrictions on access to abortion services depends upon knowing her obligations and discretion under particular statutes. Yet no statutes are cited or explained. This makes it impossible to discern any \u201cparticular duty [of Young] to enforce the statute in question\u201d or her \u201cdemonstrated willingness to exercise that duty.\u201d<\/strong> Morris, 739 F3d at 746.<strong> In addition to dismissal for lack of standing, dismissal will be entered as to sovereign immunity.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">We also need to talk about the final part (discussion on whether TST should be allowed to amend its argument yet again) because it shows why the narrative that &#8220;The Temple loses because the courts are biased against TST&#8221; is bullshit, a persecution narrative tailored to be propagated via word-of-mouth by Reddit atheists and clickbait bloggers far enough removed from the core issues as to feel justified not even doing the due diligence of reading the docket directly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Satanic Temple filed its initial complaint in February 2021. They got leave to amend that complaint later that month, and again in May 2021. The case was stayed in August 2021 pending the <em>Dobbs<\/em> decision, and TST was then granted leave to amend its complaint again after June 2022.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Not only was TST given <em>four separate chances<\/em> to make the best complaint it could, but it was explicitly spelled out for them that the fourth time was their opportunity to take into account any <em>other<\/em> changes in law that had resulted from <em>Dobbs <\/em>in the interim.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-25.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-2220\"\/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-6741296b7fd2e558059af935bc6204c0 is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-primary-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\">But whether to grant leave to amend is within the sound discretion of the district court. Pervasive Software Inc v Lexware GmbH &amp; Co KG, 688 F3d 214, 232 (5th Cir 2012), quoting Wimm v Jack Eckerd Corp, 3 F3d 137, 139 (5th Cir 1993). It may be denied \u201cwhen it would cause undue delay, be the result of bad faith, represent the repeated failure to cure previous amendments, create undue prejudice, or be futile.\u201d Morgan v Chapman, 969 F3d 238, 248 (5th Cir 2020), citing Smith v EMC Corp, 393 F3d 590, 595 (5th Cir 2004).<br><br><strong>Plaintiffs initiated this action in February 2021 with their original complaint. Dkt 1. They filed a first amended complaint as of right later that month<\/strong>. Dkt 12. <strong>They then sought and obtained leave to file a second amended complaint in May 2021<\/strong>. Dkt 26; see also Dkts 24 &amp; 25. <strong>Each of these prior iterations approached twenty pages in length and contained essential details about the subject statutes and parties<\/strong>. See Dkts 1 at \u00b6\u00b6 58\u201383, 12 at \u00b6\u00b6 58\u201384 &amp; 26 at \u00b6\u00b6 58\u201388.<br><br>Defendants named in the second amended complaint included Texas Health and Human Services Commission and Young. Dkt 26 at \u00b6\u00b6 11\u201312. They moved to dismiss, arguing that Plaintiffs lacked standing and that they failed to state plausible claims, including as to a substantive-dueprocess claim asserted under Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v Casey, 505 US 833 (1992). Dkt 28. Following lengthy hearing in August 2021, this action was stayed pending decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women\u2019s Health Organization, which by then the Supreme Court had determined to hear. See Dkt 33; see also 141 S Ct 2619 (2021) (granting certiorari). The motion to dismiss was later denied without prejudice to reassertion. See Dkt 34. <strong>In that latter order, Plaintiffs were specifically instructed to advise whether they would seek leave to file an amended complaint to account for any potential change in the law. <\/strong>See Dkt 34. <strong>They requested leave to do so in a status report entered after the decision in Dobbs.<\/strong> Dkt 37.<strong> That request was granted, resulting in the filing of the third amended complaint. <\/strong>See Dkts 38 &amp; 39<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The fact is that the court, here and around the country, actively gives TST the benefit of the doubt as a matter of black-letter law. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">But no matter how high the stakes are, TST actively squanders that benefit every time, as thoroughly as possible This court is out of patience.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-26.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-2221\"\/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-758b4348c7615327e0829f706f941ef6 is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-primary-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\">All of this was towards giving Plaintiffs the chance to replead and bring forward the best possible version of their claims. <strong>Yet they proceeded on that post-Dobbs opportunity to submit an exceedingly thin complaint, one far more diminutive than prior versions. And they did so in the face of a statutory landscape in Texas that had changed dramatically. <\/strong>This included a trigger law that took effect upon decision in Dobbs. See Tex Health &amp; Safety Code \u00a7\u00a7 170A.002\u2013170A.007. As well, the never-repealed criminal statutes predating Roe became enforceable again. See Tex Rev Civ Stat \u00a7\u00a7 4512.1\u20134512.4. <strong>Also post-dating the second amended complaint was the law permitting civil actions against physicians who perform abortions following detection of a fetal heartbeat<\/strong>. Tex Health &amp; Safety Code \u00a7\u00a7 171.204, 171.208.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">When Texas passed a bill allowing random people to play bounty hunter against abortion seekers and providers, you know what TST was doing? <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Fucking around in MS Paint, pretending to make a coherent legal argument via Venn diagrams. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">To say this is inexcusable doesn&#8217;t quite underscore how fucking contemptible this is. This is an intentional waste of vast amounts of public donations and goodwill that TST spent years soliciting from the most desperate people in the country.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full is-resized\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-30.png\" alt=\"&quot;Law&quot; Act 1 of &quot;a play in five acts&quot;\" class=\"wp-image-2247\" style=\"width:401px;height:659px\"\/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<div data-wp-interactive=\"core\/file\" class=\"wp-block-file aligncenter\"><object data-wp-bind--hidden=\"!state.hasPdfPreview\" hidden class=\"wp-block-file__embed\" data=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/Rule-65-Motion-NEVER-THE-TWAIN-SHALL-MEET.pdf\" type=\"application\/pdf\" style=\"width:100%;height:600px\" aria-label=\"Embed of Rule-65-Motion-NEVER-THE-TWAIN-SHALL-MEET.\"><\/object><a id=\"wp-block-file--media-89c95609-e927-4399-a68f-4dc116b7f82b\" href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/Rule-65-Motion-NEVER-THE-TWAIN-SHALL-MEET.pdf\">Rule-65-Motion-NEVER-THE-TWAIN-SHALL-MEET<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/Rule-65-Motion-NEVER-THE-TWAIN-SHALL-MEET.pdf\" class=\"wp-block-file__button wp-element-button\" download aria-describedby=\"wp-block-file--media-89c95609-e927-4399-a68f-4dc116b7f82b\">Download<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The judge rightly points out that TST is being far too negligent with their argument for it not to be on purpose, and highlights TST&#8217;s pattern of abusive and unethical legal &#8220;strategy&#8221; around the country. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Again: when you donate to TST, this is what they turn it into.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-27.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-2223\"\/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-4a57eb910ce4c8af177973275cdf304c is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-primary-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Given the detail of the prior complaints and these substantial changes in the law, the deficiencies in the operative complaint are no doubt intentional. And indeed, the filing of a willfully deficient amended complaint is of a piece with the mulish litigation conduct by counsel for Plaintiffs, Attorney Matt Kezhaya, in this and other actions representing The Satanic Temple. Recently considered in this regard was whether to revoke his permission to proceed pro hac vice in light of sanctions entered against him in other federal courts after his appearance here<\/strong>. For example, see Satanic Temple Inc v City of Belle Plaine, 2022 WL 1639514 (D Minn) (imposing sanctions for filing frivolous lawsuit); Satanic Temple Inc v City of Boston, 2022 WL 1028925, *6 (D Mass) (imposing sanctions for abusive subpoena practice). As summarized there:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-primary-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\"><em><strong>This Court is similarly concerned about Attorney Kezhaya\u2019s ability to practice in federal court in a professional and reasonable manner.<\/strong> For example, when initiating this action, he filed a motion for a temporary restraining order on February 5, 2021, with respect to an abortion scheduled the next day for Ann Doe\u2014when his filings made clear that he could and should have sought such relief much earlier, if it was sincerely sought. See Dkts 2 (motion for TRO) &amp; 9 (order denying relief). Following decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women\u2019s Health, 142 S Ct 2228 (2022), he was granted leave to amend his complaint. Dkt 38. The amended complaint he filed is, charitably stated, cryptic. Dkt 39. He then filed a second motion for TRO containing negligible legal analysis, with six pages of the main analysis dedicated to presentation of what\u2019s purported to be a five-act play. See Dkt 40 (motion). <strong>That motion itself was filed in a manner and on a schedule at odds with a briefing schedule on which Attorney Kezhaya had been consulted and to which he had agreed. <\/strong>See Dkt 42 (order).<strong> Worse still, he followed that motion up with an intemperate letter demanding instanter ruling, while threatening to seek mandamus relief from the Fifth Circuit. <\/strong>See Dkt 41.<strong> And most recently, as to a pending motion to dismiss, his response included a photograph apparently intended to shock the reader. <\/strong>See Dkt 52 at 6; see also Federal Rule of Evidence 403. Dkt 65 at 1\u20132. <\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">TST&#8217;s lawyer submitted a five-act play for a brief that was already late, and resorts to threats and naked shock value in lieu of coherent, let alone compelling, legal arguments. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">TST apologists have no idea how much &#8220;judicial bias&#8221; is actively working in their favor despite TST&#8217;s best efforts.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/image-28.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-2224\"\/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-2a4225e29ae7f4d833c7ad4f3dfec872 is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Litigation of constitutional claims is a serious matter. Such issues deserve serious attention from counsel desiring to be taken seriously. As it turns out, Plaintiffs might have been better served by proceeding <em>pro se<\/em> [representing themselves], as applicable standards would dictate that their filings would be \u201cliberally construed\u201d and \u201cheld to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.\u201d<\/strong> Erickson v Pardus, 551 US 89, 94 (2007), quoting Estelle v Gamble, 429 US 97, 106 (1976) (cleaned up). <strong>Instead, Plaintiffs have mustered on with counsel of their choice, and he does very little to try and assist understanding of what their claims actually are<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">And that&#8217;s the end of it, really &#8211; another defeat for TST in an unbroken line of defeats. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">No religious exemption for abortion has been established in Texas, either for TST&#8217;s current members or for anyone who joins in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Ann Doe was able to get the abortion she needed without a judge&#8217;s ruling &#8211; and that&#8217;s on the extremely generous assumption that she&#8217;s even a real person at all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">As far as we can tell from diving into TST&#8217;s contemporaneous fundraising emails and announcements throughout 2021, they raised something north of $300,000 for exactly this outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-embed is-type-rich is-provider-twitter wp-block-embed-twitter\"><div class=\"wp-block-embed__wrapper\">\n<blockquote class=\"twitter-tweet\" data-width=\"500\" data-dnt=\"true\"><p lang=\"en\" dir=\"ltr\">lol \u201creal question\u201d indeed<a href=\"https:\/\/t.co\/rdG5uau1Hq\">https:\/\/t.co\/rdG5uau1Hq<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/t.co\/3fTe53qmOv\">pic.twitter.com\/3fTe53qmOv<\/a><\/p>&mdash; QueerSatanic is on hiatus (@QueerSatanic) <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/QueerSatanic\/status\/1445629052765671431?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw\">October 6, 2021<\/a><\/blockquote><script async src=\"https:\/\/platform.twitter.com\/widgets.js\" charset=\"utf-8\"><\/script>\n<\/div><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">But clearly, TST didn&#8217;t care what the outcome would actually be \u2014 certainly not enough to pay extra to get a lawyer who might know how to make a competent argument without ratcheting himself slightly closer to disbarment instead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/QueerSatanic\"><\/a>And that&#8217;s because whatever benefits TST owners Doug Misicko&#8217;s and Cevin Soling&#8217;s bottom line is ultimately the only metric that matters for determining TST&#8217;s &#8220;success&#8221; as an institution. As far as they&#8217;re concerned, everyone else is expendable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/QueerSatanic\"><\/a>Thanks to any number of institutional barriers and the overwhelming power of negative partisanship in the United States, the only thing a &#8220;religious exemption&#8221; lawsuit has to do is exist, and donations will roll in from people who want to feel like &#8220;at least they&#8217;re doing something!&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It&#8217;s far more useful to think of TST&#8217;s &#8220;religious freedom&#8221; lawsuits as an extended ad campaign to sell the brand <em>of<\/em> TST. They exist solely to sell the idea that the fight against Christian fascism is as simple as donating and not asking what happens next.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It&#8217;s not at all hypocritical for them to pursue their SLAPP against us into the 9th Circuit, arguing for precedent that it should be easier for churches to weaponize the state against their critics. Protected speech and informed consent are a threat to their ability to sell TST.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">But that predatory, capitalist worldview disqualifies them from being able to represent the most marginalized people in the country &#8211; let alone in their own membership. It&#8217;s not remotely surprising, in that regard, to watch them hemorrhaging members more frequently as of late.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A better world is possible \u2014 but TST has no interest in building it, because building that world necessarily means destroying the institutions that give TST the power to prey on others and pretend it has no choice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Anyway, in the interest of fairness, in the last section, we&#8217;ll include what The Satanic Temple&#8217;s co-owner and national spokesman Doug &#8220;Lucien Greaves&#8221; Misicko said in his own words about all this, which you can compare to the judge&#8217;s opinion and your own eyes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center has-medium-font-size wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/\">[1]<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/2\">[2]<\/a>[3]<a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/4\">[4]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--nextpage-->\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading alignwide\">&#8220;Lucien Greaves&#8217; &#8221; Patreon post<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-843ab6c00a215d4a3ee9586ad1e5e6b3\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/#introduction\">Introduction<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/2#case-background\">Case Background<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/3#the-final-dismissal\">The Final Dismissal<\/a> (in detail)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>The Satanic Temple&#8217;s response<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\" id=\"lucien-greaves-patreon\">Here&#8217;s what <a href=\"https:\/\/www.patreon.com\/posts\/legal-update-85703577\">Doug &#8220;Lucien Greaves&#8221; Misicko said about all this on his Patreon<\/a>, emphasis added:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-vivid-purple-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-5dcc01fa944d7b9508696bd846f936a7 is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-accent-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\">Last week, we received <a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20230707194733\/https:\/\/news.bloomberglaw.com\/us-law-week\/satanic-temple-bounced-from-texas-abortion-law-challenge\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><u>an infuriating ruling<\/u><\/a> in one of our Religious Reproductive Rights lawsuits in Texas, dismissing our claim as \u201cspare and unusually cryptic,\u201d with <strong>Judge Charles Eskridge playing the role of doddering old fool, pretending that his own inability to grasp easily established facts justifies his refusal to adjudicate the claim<\/strong>.<br><br>The Judge\u2019s entire dismissal is essentially a thorough examination of our claim performed by a man acting like a child who answers every question by repeatedly asking, \u201cbut why?\u201d even when the question is entirely irrelevant. As is typical of non-Christian religious claims, the judge insists that there must be a direct doctrinal mandate explicitly stated to our religious practitioners motivating their every step in the abortion process before our claim has legitimacy. At least, that seems to be what the judge suggests when he states that \u201c[m]uch is left to conjecture\u201d in our claim that establishes the link between our belief in bodily autonomy, the Abortion Ritual, and how the Texas Laws against abortion inhibit our ability to practice our religion as we see fit.<br><br><strong>The dismissal is so thoughtless and facile that we have confidence in our appeal<\/strong>, but perhaps more infuriating than the judge\u2019s near-comical feigning of confusion and ignorance is the typical cheers of joy from the anti-TST crowd who desperately cling to any loss of ours as a personal gain for them, even as they claim to support reproductive rights themselves. <em>TST<\/em>, they love to declare, <em>does not understand the law<\/em>. This is always stated by individuals who themselves do not understand the law, nor do they have any legal theory background. In fact, when reviewed by experts, our claims are most often adjudged to be firmly grounded and well-argued. Just last week, t<a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20230707194733\/https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2023\/06\/28\/health\/abortion-religious-freedom.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><u>he New York Times ran a piece<\/u><\/a> highlighting our legal battles, with one expert declaring our reproductive rights litigation \u201cvery helpful.\u201d<br><br><strong>Those who cheer the unequal treatment that The Satanic Temple receives in the courts very clearly have allowed their distaste for TST to overshadow any dedication they might have had to Reproductive Rights, if they really ever actually cared about the issue at all<\/strong>. To accept a ruling that suggests our tenets need to directly advocate for abortion and name the specific conditions for the procedure \u2013 in a time in which Christian claims make no credible reference to Biblical proscriptions at all (ie a high school coach\u2019s claim that he needs to pray at the 50 yard line during a game, or a web designer who claims that her religion prevents her from dumping any gay content into a template) \u2013 is to accept and welcome Christian supremacy.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">So, a couple of things.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"alignright size-large is-resized\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/image-15-757x1024.png\" alt=\"Photo of middle-agd bald white man in glasses wearing a suit with no tie, Charles R Eskridge III\" class=\"wp-image-1208\" style=\"width:308px;height:417px\"\/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.txs.uscourts.gov\/page\/biography-judge-charles-r-eskridge-iii\">Biography of Judge Charles R. Eskridge III \u2013 txs.uscourts.gov<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It&#8217;s pretty comically foolish to refer to the presiding judge as a &#8220;doddering old fool,&#8221; although in fairness, it&#8217;s perfectly in keeping with the way that TST refers to the various other judges who rule against them around the country. It <em>can&#8217;t<\/em> be something The Satanic Temple is doing; it must be the &#8220;nasty corrupt judges&#8221;, as a certain former president might say. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This appeal is going to the Fifth Circuit, which is famously <a href=\"https:\/\/ballsandstrikes.org\/legal-culture\/which-is-the-worst-federal-appeals-court-and-why-is-it-the-fifth-circuit\/\">the most batshit reactionary appeals court in the entire nation<\/a>. If The Satanic Temple were to somehow prevail there, it&#8217;s a pretty safe bet that it would not be on the basis of legal reasoning that would protect anyone else from Christian nationalism in any other context. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">After all, TST is <em>also<\/em> appealing the dismissal of its SLAPP in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/docket\/66805454\/united-federation-of-churches-llc-v-david-johnson\/\">the Ninth Circuit<\/a>, attempting to establish precedent that would allow churches to sue anyone who criticized a religion&#8217;s tenets, regardless of existing defamation law or the separation of church and state. But no one in their right mind would argue that secularism is being protected by fundamentalist churches having an extra vector of wielding state power against the people they want to exterminate \u2014 secularists would probably make exactly the opposite argument, actually, and rightly wonder why TST&#8217;s priorities here exclude taking that into account.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Moreover, whether or not TST&#8217;s legal strategy regarding challenging abortion bans is actually &#8220;extremely helpful&#8221; is up for debate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In the <a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20230708063537\/https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2023\/06\/28\/health\/abortion-religious-freedom.html\"><em>New York Times<\/em> article<\/a> Misicko linked in his Patreon, TST got one favorable quote in particular to crow about: <\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-black-color has-white-background-color has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-41cc4830497c74c9486513add4b05b66 is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-primary-background-color has-background wp-block-paragraph\">Marci Hamilton, a religious freedom expert at the University of Pennsylvania who represents clergy in abortion rights lawsuits in Florida, called the temple\u2019s lawsuits \u201cextremely helpful.\u201d<br><br>\u201cThey are saying, OK, courts, if you\u2019re going to favor the religious right, we\u2019re going to show you a faith whose rights are being violated,\u201d she added.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Well, we&#8217;d love to get Hamilton&#8217;s opinion on TST&#8217;s regard for protecting religious freedom when it comes to their SLAPP suits, for instance. But TST didn&#8217;t invent that strategy and many other religions have specifically protected the right to an abortion for decades and <em>centuries<\/em> longer than the Temple has ever existed \u2014 or bothered to have a stance <em>against<\/em> abortion. We also think that it bears pointing out that however helpful that strategy might be as a template for other religions, it&#8217;s hard not to notice TST&#8217;s conspicuous absence as a party to the lawsuits brought by those other religions ostensibly following in TST&#8217;s footsteps. This is especially true in Indiana, a state where TST is not only suing as well but where an injunction on enforcing abortion bans was <a href=\"https:\/\/interactive.wthr.com\/pdfs\/order-granting-preliminary-inj-rfra-proposed-order-no-motion.pdf\">successfully granted<\/a> to an interfaith coalition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On one hand, you can reasonably say that TST has the right to determine for itself the best way to challenge abortion restrictions in any given location, regardless of how effective that turns out to be. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On the other hand, it&#8217;s just as reasonable to conclude, even speculatively, that those other plaintiffs looked at how TST actually handles itself, and decided that protecting their right to bodily autonomy was too important to let it be endangered by letting TST get involved here as well. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">We get accused sometimes of gloating when The Satanic Temple fails, but that&#8217;s not really accurate. It&#8217;s more like, &#8220;That thing we said wouldn&#8217;t and couldn&#8217;t work didn&#8217;t work, so please <em>stop<\/em> supporting these dipshit owners and lining their pockets.&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This is all the more urgent given that TST actively markets itself to the general public as though it has <em>already<\/em> successfully secured a religious exemption &#8211; a blatant falsehood that capitalizes on <a href=\"https:\/\/12ft.io\/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.editorialboard.com%2Fturns-out-the-satanists-arent-really-the-good-guys-this-time%2F\">ignoring the critical differences between state and federal laws<\/a>, and obscures the current absence of any such precedent that would allow such an exemption to exist. And, thanks to TST&#8217;s other lawsuit against Lamar Advertising, we know that Doug and Cevin were, and are, <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/QueerSatanic\/status\/1632512144486047744\">fully aware that no such precedent existed<\/a> prior to their pretending otherwise for the <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/QueerSatanic\/status\/1639771340826873857\">express purpose of catfishing prospective clients to represent<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">TST&#8217;s posturing as though it already <em>has<\/em> an exemption, and its pretense that utilizing this exemption is as straightforward as crowdfunding an indeterminate number of failed lawsuits until it stumbles on both a judge and an appeal panel that agree, jeopardizes the lives of abortion seekers in red states everywhere by encouraging them to put themselves at risk of police and domestic violence, in the uncertain hope that TST will successfully represent them when it has failed to do so for anyone else, anywhere else. You would never know that TST took this immediate risk to the lives of its followers seriously by reading any of its actual claims in court anywhere in the country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">TST has no confidence in its own arguments in court, because those arguments aren&#8217;t intended to do anything but simply exist to be fundraised off of and pointed at vaguely as &#8220;proof&#8221; that &#8220;at least TST is doing something&#8221; &#8211; a resoundingly offensive rebuttal and overt admission from whoever uses it that they have never seriously engaged with the risks incurred by abortion funds all around the country on a daily basis, in particular in the Deep South. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It beggars belief to say that a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.courtlistener.com\/docket\/59182019\/40\/the-satanic-temple-inc-v-hellerstedt\/\">court motion where nearly half the text is a five-act play comprised of Venn diagrams<\/a> was filed in the sincere belief that it would be a compelling legal argument worth however many thousands of dollars it cost to produce. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Doug is perfectly content to go on Patreon and fire off any number of childish insults at the presiding judge as a &#8220;rebuttal,&#8221; but the fact is that he didn&#8217;t even link the docket directly so that his supporters could see the arguments that their countless donations and volunteer hours have gone towards making possible. He opted instead to link a Bloomberg Law article &#8211; which is to say, behind a paywall for a service designed for legal professionals, inherently out of reach of lay consumers that are TST&#8217;s target demographic &#8211; and an NYT puff piece that engages not at all with TST&#8217;s actual courtroom history or the arguments TST made in <em>Hellerstedt<\/em> in particular (and which in fact had been published almost a week before the <em>Hellerstedt <\/em>ruling at all).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">That&#8217;s how little confidence he has in his religion&#8217;s own legal arguments&#8217; ability to do what they supposedly exist for. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">That&#8217;s how little regard he has for his followers or for the issues that draw so many of them to TST to begin with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">TST&#8217;s defeat at <em>Hellerstedt <\/em>is but the latest example of why TST is fundamentally incapable of posing any meaningful challenge to the Christian Right, and actively commits its resources to maintaining both that inability and a public charade pretending otherwise. This is simply what TST is built to do, and what it will keep doing for as long as there are people naive or desperate enough to take them at their word.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">TST&#8217;s sales pitch about being &#8220;<a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20210827082252\/https:\/\/manage.kmail-lists.com\/subscriptions\/web-view?a=VLExP9&amp;c=RysUhX&amp;k=45c6890f1d66f96d4b30becd8c04a6e6&amp;m=RZt9rX&amp;r=CKWZXMa\">the last line of defense<\/a>&#8221; is unadulterated snake oil that collapses immediately on any amount of scrutiny into their public record, with any amount of sober-minded understanding of the history of how civil rights are actually established or defended. This narrative is actively dangerous to anyone who takes it seriously enough to support TST at any level, and TST spends an untold amount of additional resources <a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/in-brief-queer-satanic-answers-satanic-temples-appeal-of-failed-slapp-suit\/\">building legal arguments explicitly meant to silence those who might expose that threat publicly<\/a>. This is what The Satanic Temple&#8217;s priorities are, because that is what The Satanic Temple <em>is<\/em> &#8211; a predatory and abusive organization that banks its legitimacy as a religion on the extent to which it is able to marginalize other people in turn, and prevent that from coming to light however it deems fit. TST is not a rebuttal of Christian theocracy, but rather an extension of it: the project of two otherwise wholly mediocre white men trying to appropriate that theocracy for themselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">And as always, it&#8217;s never been just us saying this. Doug and Cevin&#8217;s grift has been explicitly recognized as such by people much smarter than we are, and who have been invested in reproductive justice for much longer than TST has ever existed. Instead of buying another round of Doug and Cevin&#8217;s snake oil, you should <a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/the-satanic-temple-cannot-help-you-get-an-abortion-and-it-does-not-deserve-your-support\/\">listen to those people instead<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">All we&#8217;re doing is pointing out what they already know: The Satanic Temple is a threat to reproductive and religious freedom alike, and must be stopped.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center has-medium-font-size wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/\">[1]<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/2\">[2]<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/queersatanic.com\/why-did-tst-lose-its-federal-abortion-case-in-texas\/3\">[3]<\/a>[4]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Because The Satanic Temple is very bad at court cases. We&#8217;ve said it before, and we will no doubt have many occasions to say it again in the future. This article goes through the judge&#8217;s opinion in some depth to show why that judge is not a &#8220;doddering old fool&#8221;, as TST&#8217;s owner claimed in&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":2254,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2,719,776,9,902,918,1106,15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2210","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-abortion","category-cevin-soling","category-doug-misicko","category-lawsuits","category-lucien-greaves","category-matt-kezhaya","category-texas","category-the-satanic-temple"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/qs.gehenna.ynh.fr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2210","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/qs.gehenna.ynh.fr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/qs.gehenna.ynh.fr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qs.gehenna.ynh.fr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qs.gehenna.ynh.fr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2210"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/qs.gehenna.ynh.fr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2210\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/qs.gehenna.ynh.fr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2210"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qs.gehenna.ynh.fr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2210"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qs.gehenna.ynh.fr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2210"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}