Connect with us

LGBT, Civil Rights Groups Denounce Trump’s Choice of Supreme Court Nominee Neil Gorsuch

Published

on

Gorsuch Would Be the Most Conservative Justice on the Bench Except for Clarence Thomas

LGBT and civil rights groups are denouncing the choice of Neil Gorsuch to replace Antonin Scalia on the U.S. Supreme Court. Their concerns are valid. Ranking each of the eight SCOTUS justices from most liberal to most conservative, Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight shows Gorsuch would be the most conservative justice on the bench except for Clarence Thomas. In other words, Antonin Scalia was more liberal than Gorsuch is.

FiveThirtyEight senior writer Oliver Roeder posted this graphic to Twitter:

So, what are LGBT and civil rights groups saying?

Human Rights Campaign:

“Since the moment he stepped foot in the Oval Office, President Trump has attacked equality,” HRC President Chad Griffin said in a statement. “He has signed executive orders that undermine our country’s most cherished values and appointed anti-LGBTQ cabinet nominees who have spent their careers undermining civil rights. And now, he has nominated Judge Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, fulfilling his campaign promise to nominate a justice in the mold of Antonin Scalia, one of the most vehemently anti-LGBTQ justices to ever sit on the court who once went so far as to compare gay people to murderers.”

Also via HRC:

Gorsuch has a long and troubling career opposing civil rights, including for LGBTQ people:

  • Gorsuch called marriage equality part of the liberal social agenda, saying, “American liberals have become addicted to the courtroom… as the primary means of effecting their social agenda on everything from gay marriage to assisted suicide…”

  • He joined the Tenth Circuit’s decision in Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius, which asserted that  that some private corporations are “people” under federal law and have a right to deny basic healthcare coverage if it violates their religious belief.  This expansive ruling could allow employers to deny transgender employees access to hormone treatment, access to birth control and other crucial health care for LGBTQ people.

  • Hobby Lobby could have negative long-term consequences beyond health care for the LGBTQ community. There are those who are already trying to use the decision to support discrimination against LGBTQ workers.

  • In 2015, Gorsuch joined a ruling against a transgender woman who was denied consistent access to hormone therapy while incarcerated. The ruling dismissed the prisoner’s claims that the denial of care amounted to cruel and unusual punishment under the U.S. Constitution.

  • He has advocated for eliminating Chevron deference, a critical administrative law doctrine that allows our federal system of regulations to function, which could result in the significant loss protections for LGBTQ people.

GLAAD:

“Neil Gorsuch’s harmful history of discrimination against the LGBTQ community renders him completely unfit to sit on the highest court in the land,” Sarah Kate Ellis, GLAAD President & CEO, said in a statement. “He has record of advocating for anti-LGBTQ rhetoric or supporting candidates that are in favor of open discrimination against people and families who simply want to be treated the same as everyone else. Gorsuch’s presence on the Supreme Court will affect the law of the land for generations to come – long after Trump is out of office, and will turn back the clock on equality and acceptance.”

 

Lambda Legal:

First to take a position was Lambda Legal, which noted never before have they opposed a SCOTUS nominee before a confirmation hearing. And they very much oppose Judge Gorsuch, in a statement titled, “Neil Gorsuch Has an Unacceptable, Hostile Record Towards LGBT People.”

“Judge Gorsuch’s opinion in the 10th Circuit Hobby Lobby decision is disqualifying,” said Rachel B. Tiven, CEO of Lambda Legal. “The Hobby Lobby decision set a terrible and destructive standard for bosses being allowed to meddle in our sex lives and decide whether or not birth control is covered by the employer’s insurance plan. In Judge Gorsuch’s decision, he calls the inclusion of health coverage that includes birth control – ‘complicity…in the wrongdoing of others.’  Even the Supreme Court, affirming that case, acknowledged how dangerous this line of thinking is: it creates a nation in which some religions are obliged to follow the law and others are not.  Troublingly, Judge Gorsuch does not even see this as a problem.

PFLAG:

“No good has ever come from using religion as a tool to perpetrate divisiveness and harm,” Interim Executive Director Elizabeth Kohm said in a statement on Judge Gorsuch. “PFLAGers are people of faith and cannot support a nominee who seems to pass the new test imposed by the Trump Administration: Will you use the law to provide people a license to discriminate?”

Freedom for All Americans:

“With a record of defending religious liberty at the cost of infringing on individual liberties, Gorsuch’s confirmation could mean the rollback of basic freedoms and crucial protections for vulnerable LGBT people across America,” FAA’s executive director, Matt McTighe said in a statement.

OutServe-SLDN:

“We are dismayed with the actions of the Trump Administration today, in the selection of Judge Neil Gorsuch, of the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, to join the United States Supreme Court,” OutServe-SLDN Executive Director Matt Thorn said in a statement. “His record and opinions on the expansion of religious exceptions can be utilized in the marginalization and discrimination towards the LGBT and women’s communities. These opinions should be uniquely disqualifying for an appointment to our nation’s highest court. His judicial record is hostile towards members of the LGBT community, including those that have and continue to selflessly serve this great nation.”

More via Lambda Legal:

A few excerpts from Lambda Legal’s review of Gorsuch’s record:

“Judge Gorsuch has supported religious exemptions from laws based on “complicity”—the belief that adhering to the law makes the objector complicit in the allegedly sinful conduct of others.”

Lambda Legal points to Gorsuch’s opinion in the Hobby Lobby case:

“All of us face the problem of complicity.  All of us must answer for ourselves whether and to what degree we are willing to be involved in the wrongdoing of others.  For some, religion provides an essential source of guidance both about what constitutes wrongful conduct and the degree to which those who assist others in committing wrongful conduct themselves bear moral culpability. . . . Understanding that is the key to understanding this case.”

And they explain why his decision was wrong and dangerous:

Whereas the Supreme Court decision in Hobby Lobby made concerns about the impact on real people central, Judge Gorsuch did not address the harmful effects of denying access to reproductive healthcare on female employees and dependents. Instead, his sole concern was for the religious objectors who alleged that “ordering their companies to provide insurance coverage for drugs or devices whose use is inconsistent with their faith itself violates their faith, representing a degree of complicity their religion disallows.”

This is a vision of a society where religion prevails over law, and where the concerns of religious parties override the concerns of other citizens. In supporting this vision, Judge Gorsuch’s opinions open the door to all manner of assaults on the civil rights of ordinary citizens – including lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgender people and everybody living with HIV.

 

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

DeSantis Busted by Florida Paper Over ‘Horrific’ Abortion Debate Tale

Published

on

On Saturday morning the Miami Herald called out Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) for a story he told during Wednesday’s Republican Party debate about an abortion where he got the facts entirely wrong in order to make his anti-choice point.

At issue was a tale about a woman he called “Penny” who survived an abortion.

The Florida governor told a national TV audience, “I know a lady in Florida named Penny. She survived multiple abortion attempts. She was left discarded in a pan. Fortunately, her grandmother saved her and brought her to another hospital.”

According to the Herald, DeSantis got the story wrong even down to the woman’s name.

ALSO IN THE NEWS: Trump launches overnight attack on Jack Smith for making him ‘look as bad as possible’

As the Herald’s Julie K. Brown wrote, “Critics of the governor flocked to social media to suggest the “Penny” story was made up or wildly embellished. Supporters countered that liberals were triggered by an ugly truth.”

She continued, “Penny is real and her last name is Hopper. But DeSantis failed to note key details from her remarkable story: The person who tried to end Penny’s life in the womb was not a doctor or even an illegal abortion provider — it was her father. And his effort to abort his daughter with a coat hanger took place almost two decades before the Supreme Court’s seismic Roe v. Wade decision, which established a woman’s right to an abortion.

POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?

Brown added that her debunking of the DeSantis’ story “is based on previous recorded statements made by Hopper, newspaper clippings, public records and an interview with a family member who after speaking to a journalist at length asked not to be identified. She confirmed that Hopper’s version of events has been told in family circles for years.”

You can read more here.

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘Joy Reid and Rachel Maddow’ Didn’t Indict Trump, ‘Regular People’ Did: Fox News Host Destroys ‘Two-Tiered’ Justice Claims

Published

on

A Fox News host destroyed conservative claims that Donald Trump‘s criminal indictments show there’s a “two-tiered” system of justice being used against Republicans.

Jessica Tarlov, the lone liberal co-host on the conservative cable channel’s popular afternoon show, “The Five,” reminded her right-wing counterparts on Friday that Trump was indicted in four different jurisdictions by “regular people,” while pointing to a new poll that finds majorities of Americans believe he is guilty of the federal crimes he has been charged with and if convicted believe he should be imprisoned.

“Donald Trump was indicted in four jurisdictions around this country, by juries of regular Americans in New York, in D.C., and Atlanta, and in South Florida, where he calls home,” Tarlov said. “This wasn’t Joy Reid and Rachel Maddow sitting there. It was regular people who listened to the evidence that was brought before them.”

READ MORE: ‘Rich Men North of Richmond’ Singer Mocks GOP Candidates After Song Used in Debate: It’s ‘Definitely’ About Them

“When you say that people are rallying behind him, his diehard base is, but the average American isn’t,” she continued.

“There’s new polling out today. 62% think that he committed a crime, including 67% of independents. 61% think that he must stand trial before the election. Why? Because you don’t want to put someone in office who’s going to jail, and 59% think that the DOJ is being fair.”

“That shoots straight through the argument that this is a ‘two-tiered’ system of justice,” she continued. “If you don’t like that Joe Biden is fundraising off of it, you know, Donald Trump is doing the same thing, he’s having his moment. Mitch McConnell even – remember he fundraised off of ‘Cocaine Mitch.'”

Watch below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Rich Men North of Richmond’ Singer Mocks GOP Candidates After Song Used in Debate: It’s ‘Definitely’ About Them

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘Rich Men North of Richmond’ Singer Mocks GOP Candidates After Song Used in Debate: It’s ‘Definitely’ About Them

Published

on

Country-folk singer-songwriter Oliver Anthony, who wrote the Billboard number one hit song used in the opening of Wednesday night’s first GOP 2024 presidential debate on Fox News is mocking the Republican candidates on stage for embracing it, revealing for the first time the song is “definitely” written about them.

Declaring that “what makes us strong is our diversity,” Anthony says, “it was funny seeing it at the presidential debate, ’cause it’s like, I wrote that song about those people, you know,” he said with a chuckle.

“So for them to have to sit there and listen to that, that cracks me up,” Anthony added, laughing a bit more. “But it was funny kind of seeing the response to it, like that song has nothing to do with Joe Biden, you know, it’s a lot bigger than Joe Biden. That song’s written about the people on that stage and a lot more too, not just them, but definitely them.”

Fox News opened the debate with clips of Americans complaining about inflation and the cost of living, along with a clip of President Joe Biden saying that his economic plan, dubbed Bidenonmics, is working.

READ MORE: Poll: Trump Guilty of Crimes, DOJ Decision to Indict Was Fair Say Majority of US – Half Call for Prison if Convicted

“As we sit here tonight,” Fox News host and debate moderator Martha MacCallum said Wednesday, to cheers and applause from the audience in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, “the number one song on the Billboard chart is called ‘Rich Men North of Richmond,'”

“It is by a singer from FarmVille, Virginia named Oliver Anthony. His lyrics speak of alienation, of deep frustration with the state of government, and of this country. Washington, D.C. is about 100 miles north of Richmond,” MacCallum concluded before playing a short portion of the song.

“Why is this song striking such a nerve in this country right now? What do you think it means?” she asked.

On Thursday, The Washington Post published a short clip of Fox News using the song during the debate, and after, Oliver Anthony, whose actual name is Christopher Anthony Lunsford, talking about himself and his political beliefs.

READ MORE: ‘A Threat to US National Security’: Experts Disturbed by Trump ‘Stoking Passion and Hatred’ Around Question of Civil War

“We got to go back to the roots of what made this country great in the first place,” Anthony says, “which was our sense of community and our, I mean, we are the melting pot of the world and that’s what makes us strong is our diversity and we need to learn to harness that, appreciate it, and not use it as a political tool to keep everyone separate from each other.”

“I sit pretty down the center on politics, and always have, it seems like you know, both sides serve the same master and that master is not someone of any good to the people of this country,” he added.

READ MORE: Kellyanne Conway Urges GOP to Attack Abortion as Biden Campaign Releases Ad Pledging to Protect Women’s Rights

Watch the videos of Oliver Anthony above or at this link.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.