The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday heard arguments against the City of Philadelphia in a case brought by Catholic Social Services. By all accounts the six-justice conservative majority was not merely dismissive of equality and LGBTQ rights in favor of special rights for Christian-based organizations, but openly-hostile to the very idea that LGBTQ people and same-sex couples could be good parents.
Catholic Social Services (CSS) lost in a unanimous 2018 lower court ruling when it sued the City of Philadelphia for refusing to send children to it for foster placement because the religious organization reneged on its agreement to place children with LGBTQ parents and same-sex couples.
Far right wing Justice Clarence Thomas used a thinly-veiled analogy of a swimming pool to argue what’s in the “best interest” of a child.
“Don’t you think it’s in the best interest of the the child to also have a pool, that is, that is beneficial to the child?” Thomas asked, as The Washington Blade reports. “I don’t understand why that isn’t also in the best interest of the child.”
Justice Samuel Alito decided to push false animus in what sounded like a conspiracy theory.
“If we are honest about what’s really going on here, it’s not about ensuring that same-sex couples in Philadelphia have the opportunity to be foster parents,” Alito claimed. “It’s the fact that the city can’t stand the message that Catholic Social Services and the archdiocese are sending by continuing to adhere to the old-fashioned view about marriage.”
Justice Brett Kavanaugh insisted the City of Philadelphia was somehow attacking the Catholic group. He called Philadelphia’s position, that LGBTQ people cannot be excluded, “extreme.”
“It seems like Philadelphia created a clash, it seems, and was looking for a fight, and brought that serious controversy all the way to the Supreme Court.”
Philadelphia did not bring the case to the Supreme Court. Philadelphia won the case. Catholic Social Services brought the case tot he Supreme Court.
(Kavanaugh was recently criticized for making a serious error in an opinion last week so dire it had to be corrected.)
And then there’s the Court’s newest, and most extreme Justice, Amy Coney Barrett.
Here’s how the ACLU’s Josh Block characterized her questioning:
“Barrett asks what would happen if an agency had a religious objection to serving couples in interracial marriages? CSS says government has a compelling interest in eradicating racial discrimination, but not discrimination against same-sex couples. Very scary response.”