Connect with us

House GOP’s Anti-Gay Supreme Court Brief Reads Like 1950’s Racist Propaganda

Published

on

The House GOP on Tuesday filed a 60-page brief in the Supreme Court that addresses the upcoming DOMA case of Edie Windsor, and it reads like 1950’s racist propaganda.

READ: Republicans File Brief in Support Of DOMA – Gays Are Doing Fine Without Any Help

DOMA, by the way, is the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 that bans the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages.

The brief, filed by John Boehner‘s hand-picked private attorney, Paul Clement — whom Boehner has secretly authorized to receive up to $3 million to defend DOMA — addresses the question:

Whether Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, 1 U.S.C. § 7, violates the equal protection component of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Clement, who has never, ever won a same-sex marriage case since Boehner hired him at the rate of $520 an hour to work for the “BLAG,” the House of Representatives’ Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group that has as its majority Republicans not Democrats, has decided that “traditional marriage” must be defended for these reasons:

“Gays and Lesbians Are Far from Politically Powerless.”

“DOMA Rationally Preserves Each Sovereign’s Ability to Define Marriage for Itself at a Time When States Are Beginning to Experiment with the Traditional Definition.”

“Congress Rationally Proceeded with Caution When Faced with the Unknown Consequences of an Unprecedented Redefinition of Marriage, a Foundational Social Institution, by a Minority of States.”

“Sexual Orientation Is Not an “Immutable” Characteristic.”

Among others, of course.

And look out, because the LGBT community is omnipotent!

More than twenty years ago, the Seventh and Ninth Circuits recognized that “homosexuals … are not without growing political power,” and that “[a] political approach is open to them” to pursue their objectives. Ben-Shalom, 881 F.2d at 466; accord High Tech Gays, 895 F.2d at 574. Whatever the limits of that conclusion two decades ago, there can be no serious doubt that the political power of gays and lesbians has increased exponentially since then.

In short, gays and lesbians are one of the most influential, best-connected, best-funded, and best- organized interest groups in modern politics, and have attained more legislative victories, political power, and popular favor in less time than virtually any other group in American history. Characterizing such a group as politically powerless would be wholly inconsistent with this Court’s admonition that a class should not be regarded as suspect when the group has some “ability to attract the attention of the lawmakers.”

And this, which can only be described as the “shuck and jive” of Paul Clement’s anti-gay animus:

There is no precedent for creating a suspect class that is based on the class’ propensity to engage in a certain kind of conduct.

Not only is sexual orientation different from every recognized suspect class in that it is based on a propensity to engage in certain conduct, the cause of that propensity is not well understood.

A “propensity to engage in certain conduct”? Really? I’d like you to take a moment, pause, and reflect on what Attorney Clement might be suggesting there.

Other reasons Clement gives for denying same-sex couples the benefit of marriage that is the birthright of heterosexual couples?

1. Providing a Stable Structure to Raise Unintended and Unplanned Offspring
2. Encouraging the Rearing of Children by Their Biological Parents
3. Promoting Childrearing by Both a Mother and a Father

Curiously, Clement notes that when DOMA was passed, in “the Senate supporters included then-Senator Biden; then-Minority Leader Daschle; current Majority Leader Reid; and current Judiciary Committee Chairman Leahy. In the House, Rep. Hoyer, the Current Minority Whip, supported DOMA.”

All those have in some manner, if not specifically, come out in support of same-sex marriage. Daschle lost his seat after fighting a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

Later, Clement quotes Jonathan Rauch, identifying him as a gay marriage supporter, which he was not — but now is.

Perhaps extremely disgusting is the argument Clement cites, from 1996:

As Senator Gramm observed, without DOMA, state recognition of same- sex marriage will create

a whole group of new beneficiaries—no one knows what the number would be—tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, potentially more—who will be beneficiaries of newly created survivor benefits under Social Security, Federal retirement plans, and military retirement plans…. [I]t will impose … a whole new set of benefits and expenses which have not been planned or budgeted for under current law.

And:

If the federal government were forced to recognize same-sex marriages, Sen. Byrd noted, “it is [not] inconceivable that the costs associated with such a change could amount to hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions … of Federal taxpayer dollars.”

[Bolding ours]

Clement writes, “in 1996 when it appeared that states soon would begin experimenting with changing the traditional definition [of marriage], the federal government was under no obligation to follow suit.”

In what other venue, issue, etc., does anyone refer to changing a law as “experimenting”?

Is ensuring First Amendment rights “experimenting”? Are anti-fracking laws labeled “experimenting”? Are laws ensuring children receive certain levels of education classified as  “experimenting”?

Why is same-sex marriage called “experimenting”?

And then this, what amount to their final argument: gays are already too powerful:

Creating new suspect classes takes issues away from the democratic process, and this Court has wisely refrained from recognizing new suspect classes over the last four decades. Homosexuality would be a particularly anomalous place to eschew that reluctance, as gays and lesbians have substantial political power, which has grown exponentially with each election cycle. Nor do the other factors this Court has looked to support recognizing a new suspect class here. To the contrary, with an issue as divisive and fast-moving as same-sex marriage, the correct answer is to leave this issue to the democratic process. In that process, there is a premium on persuading opponents, rather than labeling them as bigots motivated by animus. And the democratic process allows compromise and way-stations, whereas constitutionalizing an issue yields a one-size-fits-all-solution that tends to harden the views of those who lose out at the courthouse, rather than the ballot box. In the final analysis, the democratic process is at work on this issue; there is no sound reason to constitutionalize it.

And then this: Government must defend traditional marriage and exclude same-sex couples from the institution because heterosexuals are irresponsible:

The link between procreation and marriage itself reflects a unique social difficulty with opposite-sex couples that is not present with same-sex couples— namely, the undeniable and distinct tendency of opposite-sex relationships to produce unplanned and unintended pregnancies. Government from time immemorial has had an interest in having such unintended and unplanned offspring raised in a stable structure that improves their chances of success in life and avoids having them become a burden on society.

Ian Millhiser at Think Progress makes the case as well:

One can only wonder what Paul Clement might have written if Virginia had hired him to defend their practice of racial marriage discrimination when it was before the justices in 1967. “Negro leaders meet often with the President and with Congressional leaders, and indeed, President Johnson himself signed two major laws pushed by the Negro lobby. Negro groups not only led a widely attended rally on the National Mall, but they routinely organize well-attended sit-ins, marches and other events that garner press attention and national sympathy. Recently, a Negro march at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Alabama even sparked the President of the United States to give a speech endorsing the Negro lobby’s agenda before a joint session of Congress.”

Because, of course, if the fact that gay people have won a few political battles lately were reason to deny them the equal protection of the laws, then the same would also be true about African-Americans and women. Lyndon Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act two years before Virginia lost its marriage discrimination case in the Supreme Court. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 promised equal treatment to women in the workplace — a promise still denied to gay men and lesbians —seven years before the justices first recognized that official discrimination against women violates the Constitution. Political victories do not cancel out Americans’ constitutional rights, they augment them, and Clement is simply wrong to suggest otherwise.

Read the entire brief, below:

House GOP’s BLAG files SCOTUS brief in support of DOMA by

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.

RIGHT WING EXTREMISM

Top Anti-Abortion Lobbying Org Doubles Down to Support ‘Pro-Life’ Herschel Walker Despite Report and Son’s Allegations

Published

on

The top anti-abortion lobbying group, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, doubling down in their support for Herschel Walker, the GOP’s nominee for a U.S. Senate seat in Georgia, despite a damning report in the media and allegations from Walker’s own son.

Overnight The Daily Beast reported Walker, who claims to be against all abortion, paid for an abortion for his girlfriend. Walker has attacked U.S. Senator Raphael Warnock, his Democratic opponent, over abortion, drumming up falsehoods like saying Warnock, a Christian pastor who is pro-choice, “relished a woman killing her baby.”

Walker’s own son, Christian Walker, who has been a steadfast supporter publicly of his father’s candidacy, revealed overnight and Tuesday morning that his father has committed “atrocities” against their family, caused his mother and him to move six times in six months, and was an absentee father despite attacking Black men in general for that very same behavior.

READ MORE: ‘Everything Has Been a Lie’: Christian Walker Drops Damning New Video Blasting His Father’s ‘Lies’ Over Abortion

Now, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, once called the Susan B. Anthony List, is standing by Walker despite his reported abortion actions.

Axios’ Alexi McCammond says they asked SBA Pro-Life America if the anti-abortion lobbying organization still supported Walker.

“Hershel Walker has denied these allegations in the strongest possible terms and we stand firmly alongside him,” SBA spokesperson Mallory Carroll told McCammond.

“She added that their GA field team ‘has visited more than 310,000 homes across the state in support of pro-life candidates like Herschel and against the extremism of Sen. Warnock and Stacy Abrams, and we will continue through Election Day,'” McCammond reports.

READ MORE: Herschel Walker Has a Second Secret Child – Despite Denouncing ‘Fatherless’ Black Homes

SBA tweeted their support of Walker back in May, calling him a “pro-life champion” when they endorsed him.

In January of 2020 Right Wing Watch reported the “Susan B. Anthony List and its Women Speak Out super PAC are launching a $52 million campaign effort on behalf of [re-electing] Trump and Republican senators.”

Continue Reading

News

‘Everything Has Been a Lie’: Christian Walker Drops Damning New Video Blasting His Father’s ‘Lies’ Over Abortion

Published

on

Christian Walker, the son of the Republican Party of Georgia’s nominee to be a U.S. Senator is out with a new video Tuesday morning blasting his father, Herschel Walker, and Republicans who he says knew about his philandering father’s past and suggesting they even called him telling him it’s important for the party that he win, despite the latest bombshell news.

Monday evening The Daily Beast reported Herschel Walker, the former NFL star running for Senate as a “pro-life” candidate who supports zero exceptions for abortion, paid for an abortion for his girlfriend.

Walker said he and his mother “could have ended” his father’s Senate campaign, one first pushed by and then endorsed by Donald Trump, “on day one.” And he criticized the “family values” contingent on the right for their hypocrisy in endorsing his father despite his past.

“I stayed silent as the atrocities committed against my mom were downplayed, I stayed silent when it came out that my father, Herschel Walker, had all these random kids across the country, none of whom he raised,” Christian Walker charges in his latest video. “And you know, my favorite issue to talk about is father absence – surprise – ’cause it affected me. That’s why I talk about it all the time, because it affected me.”

READ MORE: Herschel Walker Raked in Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars Giving Paid Speeches While a Candidate for Senate: Report

Walker, a social media influencer who has strongly supported his father’s candidacy until The Daily Beast’s story Monday night, went on to attack “family values” conservatives.

“Family Values people: He has four kids, four different women, wasn’t in the house raising one of them,” Walker said about his father Herschel. “He was out having sex with other women. Do you care about family values? I was silent lie after lie after lie. The  abortion card drops yesterday – it’s literally his handwriting in the card. They say they have receipts, whatever. He gets on Twitter, he likes about it. Okay, I’m done.”

Herschel Walker is running to unseat Democratic U.S. Senator Raphael Warnock, a pastor. Warnock has not commented on the Daily Beast’s bombshell.

“Everything has been a lie. And so for the right to say I’m being suspicious. We’re saying hey, I’m done with the lies when you all have been calling me saying, ‘is this true about your dad? Gosh, we’re not going to win Georgia. This candidate and all –’ that’s been you.”

READ MORE: Herschel Walker’s Remarks Against Same-Sex Marriage Resurface: ‘Each State Can Just Stop All of That’

“You have no idea what I’ve been through in my life. You have no idea what me and my mom have survived. We could have ended this on day one. We haven’t. I haven’t told any stories. I’m just saying don’t lie. Don’t lie on my mom. Don’t lie on me. Don’t lie on the lives you’ve destroyed and act like you’re some moral family man. Y’all should care about that, conservatives.”

Walker also claimed “the left” has been blaming him, “as though I’m responsible for all of the things that he has done. I’ve talked about other issues. I’ve talked about these because they’ve been close to me, because they matter to me because I went through it. That’s why I’ve talked about it. So when you say well, ‘talk about your dad,’ I am I’m saying this behavior is atrocious. Don’t come for me. You don’t have to like my policies. You don’t have to like me. You don’t have to. I’m just saying, I’m done with the lies.”

According to Walker, he was promised his father would lead a different life when he decided to run for Senate.

“We were told at the beginning of this he was going to get ahead of his past, hold himself accountable, all of these different things. And that would have been fine. Go ahead. He didn’t do any of that. Everything’s been a lie. Everything’s been downplayed. Everything’s been cutting corners, the whole thing, and who who is whose expense is that? Me, my mom. as were chased down by the media. We were terrorized, all these different things. People are questioning my authenticity. I’m done. Don’t lie. Don’t put this on me. You — This is a candidate issue. Not a me issue. I wouldn’t have spoken out if there weren’t all these lives every day.”

READ MORE: ‘Pathological Liar’: Herschel Walker’s Own Advisors Don’t Trust Him, Think He Isn’t Mentally Fit for the Job – Report

The Daily Beast in recent months also reported Walker has had four children with four different women, at least two of whom were not previously known.

Herschel Walker is denying the Daily Beast’s reporting.

Watch below or at this link.

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Trump’s Chief of Staff Implicated in Mar-a-Lago Docs Scheme by New Bombshell Reporting

Published

on

Former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows may have been implicated in the Mar-a-Lago documents case by one of Donald Trump’s attorneys, according to a new report.

The New York Times reported that Trump attorney Patrick Philbin falsely told the lawyer for the National Archives last September that the former president had taken only non-classified material such as newspaper clippings home with him from the White House, two sources told the New York Times.

Philbin told National Archives lawyer Gary Stern that he learned that information from Meadows, the former White House chief of staff, and one of the sources said Stern preserved his own description of that exchange in an email.

That claim turned out to be false after FBI agents executed a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago in August and found thousands of pages of presidential records, including hundreds that contained classified information, stashed in Trump’s office and other areas at the private club.

IN OTHER NEWS: Reporter reveals new detail that ‘puts Trump at the center’ of stolen docs case

Another Trump attorney, Alex Cannon, told the former president in fall 2021 that officials with the archives wanted those materials back and warned him that a criminal referral could result if he refused to comply, according to a person familiar with the discussions, but Trump basically ignored him.

Trump eventually turned over 15 boxes of government materials in January and asked Cannon to tell the archives that those were all the documents he had taken from the White House, but the lawyer declined because he wasn’t sure if that was true.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.