Connect with us

Breaking: Georgia Senate Passes Discriminatory Anti-LGBT ‘Religious Freedom’ Bill By Huge Margin

Published

on

GOP Senators Allowed No Amendments to Be Proposed to Fast-Tracked Bill – Could Be Signed Into Law as Soon as Monday

The Georgia First Amendment Defense Act just passed the Senate by a vote of 38-14. The bill now makes its way back to the Georgia House, which only needs to agree on it. In all likelihood, given that a previous version passed unanimously, it will. The anti-gay “religious freedom” legislation could be signed into law by GOP Gov. Nathan Deal as soon as Monday, after the House reconvenes.

The bill, known as FADA, like many that have been making their way around the nation’s legislatures this year, makes anti-LGBT discrimination legal by providing special protections for people who wish to claim their religious faith prohibits them from performing certain acts, including baking a cake for a same-sex wedding, or allowing a child to be adopted by a same-sex couple.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State analyzed the legislation, and concludes the bill “allows any individual or ‘faith-based’ business, non-profit entity, or taxpayer-funded organization to ignore any law that conflicts with their religious beliefs about marriage.”

UPDATE: Georgia Based Telecom Says ‘Time to Relocate’ After Lawmakers Pass Anti-Gay ‘Religious Freedom’ Bill

During the initial hearing Friday morning, Republican senators led by Sen. Greg Kirk (photo, lower center), moved quickly to engross the bill, banning any amendments to the legislation from being proposed. 

In explaining the bill before the vote Friday, Sen. Greg Kirk claimed it does not impact any business, including its relationship with employees, and claimed “it is a live and let live bill.” Legal experts disagree.

In a letter to Georgia Senators this week, Maggie Garrett, AU’s Legislative Director explains “any person, business, or taxpayer-funded organization could refuse anyone else rights, services, and benefits because they: are part of an interracial couple; are part of an interfaith couple; are a single mother; are part of a same-sex couple; are divorced; are remarried; live or have lived with a partner without being married; or have had sex outside of marriage at any time in their life.”

Just a few of the troubling real life consequences could include: a single mother and her child being denied safety at the domestic violence shelter; a hospital denying a man the opportunity to say goodbye to his dying husband; a cemetery corporation denying an interracial couple a shared cemetery plot; a restaurant refusing to allow a child’s birthday party because his parents are divorced; or an unmarried couple and their child being denied a room at a hotel late at night after their car broke down.

Senator Kirk, who is also a minister, told his fellow lawmakers concerned about religious organizations denying help to someone because they are LGBT, “I have never known a faith-based organization to turn anyone away.” 

“This law does not allow discrimination,” he falsely stated.

He then told the Senators that on Sunday, “I want you to look at those church members in the eye and tell them how you voted.”

Democratic Senator Emanuel Jones, who is Black, challenged Kirk on his definition of “faith-based organizations,” noting that the KKK would fall under that definition. Kirk then compared the Black Panthers to the KKK.

UPDATE: Sponsor Of Georgia’s ‘Religious Freedom’ Bill Has ‘No Problem’ Knowing It Would Protect The KKK

Despite excellent arguments by Democratic senators, the bill passed by a huge margin.

 

This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. This story will be updated, and NCRM will likely publish follow-up stories on this news. Stay tuned and refresh for updates.

 

Image by Lori Geary via Twitter

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Did Not Rule Against Trump’s Tariffs’: Bessent Offers Alternative Interpretation

Published

on

Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent delivered an alternative interpretation of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on Friday that struck down the legal basis for the president’s sweeping global tariffs, which the justices ruled was an unlawful use of executive authority.

“President Trump will always put our national security and Americans first,” Bessent told the Economic Club of Dallas, as Mediaite reported.

“Let’s be clear about what today’s ruling was and what it wasn’t. Despite the misplaced gloating from Democrats, ill-informed media outlets, and the very people who gutted our industrial base — the court did not rule against President Trump’s tariffs,” Bessent insisted.

Rather, he continued, the six justices “simply ruled that IEEPA authorities cannot be used to raise even $1 of revenue.”

He vowed that the Trump administration would “invoke alternative legal authorities” to replace the vehicle used to collect tariffs, which he said would be “virtually” equal to the level that was previously being collected.

The Secretary, commenting on whether consumers will get refunds from the approximately $175 billion in tariffs already collected, also said, “I got a feeling the American people won’t see it.”

READ MORE: Bush-Era ‘Torture Memo’ Author Warns Trump to Stop Smearing SCOTUS Over Tariff Ruling

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

Bush-Era ‘Torture Memo’ Author Warns Trump to Stop Smearing SCOTUS Over Tariff Ruling

Published

on

A former Bush Justice Department official is warning President Donald Trump against smearing the U.S. Supreme Court after the justices delivered a highly anticipated ruling that struck down the legal foundation of his sweeping global tariffs — a major setback for his economic agenda.

“It’s my opinion that the court has been swayed by foreign interests and a political movement that is far smaller than people would ever think,” the president said on Friday, as the Guardian reported. Trump said he was “ashamed” of the six justices who sided with the majority opinion. “Absolutely ashamed for not having the courage to do what’s right for our country.”

“They’re just being fools and lapdogs for the Rinos [Republicans in name only] and the radical left Democrats, and not that they should have anything at all to do with it,” Trump added. “They’re very unpatriotic and disloyal to our constitution.”

John Yoo, the prominent Bush administration Deputy Assistant Attorney General known for writing what have been called the “torture memos,” appeared on Fox News on Friday and warned the president.

READ MORE: Donald Trump’s Very Bad Day

“I think President Trump would be wise to no longer call the justices somehow tools of foreign influence,” he said, reminding him that the Roberts Supreme Court has been giving him “a number of wins.”

Yoo also noted that, had he been at the DOJ under President Trump, he would have been “shuddering” when he heard him speak about the court as he did, “because President Trump has got a number of other big cases pending at the court, like whether it can fire the heads of independent commissions, whether it can fire a governor of the Federal Reserve Board, whether redistricting can go on.”

Even Fox News is telling Trump to pump the brakes on accusing SCOTUS of being controlled by foreign actors, reminding him he has other “big cases” before the court.

John Yoo: “I think President Trump would be wise to no longer call the justices somehow tools of foreign influence.”

[image or embed]

— Justin Baragona (@justinbaragona.bsky.social) February 20, 2026 at 2:31 PM


READ MORE: ‘Can’t Play Cute With Me’: Trump Tries to Spin Big-Power Snub of Peace Board
 

Image via Reuters 

 

Continue Reading

News

Epstein Files Scandal Is ‘Never Going to Go Away’: Carville

Published

on

Political commentator and strategist James Carville says the Epstein files scandal is not ever going to go away.

“It’s never gonna go away, and if you think about it, it can’t go away,” Carville told to Al Hunt on their Politicon podcast.

“What do you have?” he continued. “You have a really rich guy, filthy rich … with a glamorous woman who’s harvesting young women around the world. You got princes, and Ivy League professors, and politicians, and bankers, and sports organizers, and didn’t get all of that. And then you got a dead body.”

“And then you got secrecy everywhere, and it’s not going away 30 years from now. They’re gonna still be digging through that stuff. They lied about everything,” Carville said.

READ MORE: Donald Trump’s Very Bad Day

“There’s nothing you can say to make this go away,” he continued. “And there’s so much s — — we don’t know.”

“You know, I didn’t — I must say, six months ago, I did not think that the Epstein issue would still be with us, and certainly not with us through the 2026 campaign,” Hunt said. “I was wrong.”

“There are three reasons it’s not going away. Number one, the dissembling, by the White House, and its subsidiary, the Justice Department — there clearly is a cover up of some stuff,” he added.

“Two, Ro Khanna, a liberal Democrat, and Tom Massey, a conservative Republican, are leading the fight for full exposure. They have proven to be bulldogs, and they won’t give up,” Hunt said.

He added that the third reason the Epstein files are here to stay “is those victims, the women who have courageously spoken up against the sexual abuse trafficking of Epstein and his accomplice, Maxwell, won’t be silenced until the Justice Department ends this limited hangout approach.”

Hunt also pointed to “a headline in Wednesday’s Washington Post, quote, Epstein fallout rattles the globe. Many powerful people face consequences,” which he noted was “true in every place but the Trump administration.”

READ MORE: ‘Can’t Play Cute With Me’: Trump Tries to Spin Big-Power Snub of Peace Board

 

Image via Shutterstock

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.