Connect with us

COMMENTARY

‘Sweeping New Right to Discriminate’: Legal Experts Warn on Latest Anti-LGBTQ SCOTUS Case That’s ‘Unlikely to Go Well’

Published

on

The far-right U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday made an unusual move: it will hear arguments in a legal battle that effectively doesn’t even exist. The Court is once again diving headfirst into a First Amendment case involving the rights of LGBTQ people to exist and function equally in American society and religious right extremists who are demanding special rights to impose their beliefs on top of valid laws.

The Court this fall will hear arguments of a Colorado Christian who says she wants to expand her business into producing wedding websites but doesn’t want to do business with LGBTQ couples, who she says violate her religious beliefs.

Lorie Smith has not expanded her business and has not been approached by any same-sex couples to produce a wedding website for them. No one has been harmed in the “case,” which officially is 303 Creative v. Elenis. Some say since no harm has been shown, the Supreme Court should not have taken the case, but it’s clear they have an agenda.

Smith wants to post a statement saying she will not work with same-sex couples, but that would violate Colorado’s non-discrimination law. She could just set up shop and decide what to do if she is approached by a same-sex couple. Instead, the Supreme Court’s ultra-conservative (and some say theocratic) justices on the right have decided this case merits their review.

NBC News’ Pete Williams reports that “a federal appeals court ruled that her refusal and her proposed statement would violate Colorado’s anti-discrimination law.”

The Court has already made clear how it views the case. Smith is not a small business person but “an artist,” being “compelled,” which implies they see the case as an issue of free speech and freedom of expression:

The “Supreme Court said it would take up the case to consider ‘whether applying a public-accommodation law to compel an artist to speak or stay silent violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.'”

“Spoiler alert,” warns Vox’s Ian Millhiser. “This is unlikely to go well for LGBTQ people.”

He adds: “The Supreme Court appears eager to give religious conservatives sweeping exemptions from the law,” and adds that the Court “appears ready to come out and say that at least some businesses have a constitutional right to discriminate.”

Smith, Millhiser writes, “wants the Supreme Court to give her license to design wedding websites for opposite-sex couples — and only for opposite-sex couples.”

Noting that the “Supreme Court ducked this question in Masterpiece Cakeshop, but will now address it with a 6–3 conservative supermajority,” Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern writes that it “is very likely that the court will cut back LGBTQ non-discrimination laws’ application to artists, especially in the context of same-sex weddings.”

Stern calls the case “a direct threat to government’s ability to bar discrimination in public accommodations.” He says the case “reaches far beyond LGBTQ non-discrimination laws, threatening ALL civil rights laws that, as SCOTUS put it, ‘compel an artist to speak or stay silent.'”

“Dark days ahead,” Stern says. “This case is so much more than a culture war skirmish. It’s the culmination of a decades-long conservative assault on the constitutional foundations of our modern civil rights regime.”

Smith is represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, a legal firm that appears on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of anti-gay hate groups.

 

Image by Ted Eytan via Flickr and a CC license

 

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.

COMMENTARY

Grassley Slammed for Turning Photo With Iowa Family Who Drove 856 Miles to DC Into ‘Cheap Political Talking Point’

Published

on

Seven-term Republican U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley, who has served the people of Iowa since 1959, is being criticized for using a photo of a family from his home state who drove all the way to Washington, D.C. He suggested they complained about the price of gas after their long journey, and his caption on the photo of him with the family ties into his campaign re-election talking points.

Senator Grassley, 88, who is running for re-election and known for a unique style of tweeting, posted this on Monday:

That same day Grassley posted this tweet about gas prices, a common GOP talking point they are falsely blaming on President Joe Biden.

Writer, activist, former press secretary and communications director Charlotte Clymer blasted Senator Grassley, saying the family deserved “a hell of a lot better” than to be used for “a cheap and ridiculous political talking point.”

Other responses to the photo of Grassey and the Iowa family pointed out the obvious fact that if their goal was to talk about the price of gas they could have saved a 13 hour and 26-minute drive, each way (according to Google Maps) and just picked up the phone or met their Senator in a local office.

Continue Reading

COMMENTARY

‘Find a Spine’: State Farm Criticized After Celebrating Pride Then Dropping Program Supporting LGBTQ Books in Schools

Published

on

Over the past year, insurance giant State Farm has posted ten tweets supporting LGBTQ people, programs, and organizations, as recently as last week:

The $79 billion company will turn 100 years old next month, which coincidentally is LGBTQ Pride Month. It has made strong statements in support of LGBTQ equality and diversity. Just last June they tweeted: “We believe no one should be afraid to celebrate who they are. Let’s support our LGBTQ+ neighbors and show our Pride together!” They even tagged the tweet with their own corporate branding, using #GoodNeighbor and #PrideMonth hastags.

So many were left stunned when the Illinois-based corporation’s chief diversity officer sent an email to employees and agents, as The Daily Beast reports, stating it was dropping its “support of a philanthropic program, GenderCool,” saying it “has been the subject of news and customer inquiries.”

The program helps put LGBTQ-inclusive books into libraries and schools.

“This program that included books about gender identity was intended to promote inclusivity,” Victor Terry continued. “We will no longer support that program.”

And in an apparent bowing down to rising far right-wing extremism and anti-LGBTQ hate, the diversity expert declared, “conversations about gender and identity should happen at home with parents.”

The right-wing outlet Washington Examiner on Monday, as part of a series titled “Restoring America” published a report on State Farm’s support of LGBTQ students: “Backlash prompts State Farm to end program donating trans books to schools.” That article was a follow-up to one the very same day titled, “State Farm donating transgender books for 5-year-olds to schools in Florida.”

Here’s what those two pieces look like:

 

Outrage over State Farm’s “180” was immediate.

Well-known LGBTQ Activist and writer Charlotte Clymer explained via her Substack platform:

Parker Molloy, also a well-known LGBTQ activist and writer, blasted State Farm.

She adds: “One of the reasons this is getting to me so much has to do with the fact that my dad (who is great and accepting, etc.) is a State Farm agent. That company has been a part of my life for as long as I’ve been alive.”

Bobby Lewis, who writes for Media Matters, tweeted, “something as anodyne as a fucking insurance company buying kids books turned into another fascist outrage campaign, and the corporate cowards caved in a second. it’s pathetic.”

He wasn’t finished, adding: “corporate pride is all window dressing that will never save anyone, but goddamn find a spine you sniveling cowards.”

RELATED –
Far Right Activist Behind CRT Panic Brags About Attacks on Disney, State Farm for LGBTQ Support: Others ‘Will Be Next’

Veteran journalist Michelangelo Signorile, host of the SiriusXM Progress’ “Signorile Show” and writer of The Signorile Report newsletter calls State Farm’s actions “grotesque as LGBTQ rights are backsliding across the country. Now companies joining Ron DeSantis, MAGA and the ‘don’t say gay’ purge.”

More responses:

 

Image by State Farm via Flickr and a CC license

Continue Reading

COMMENTARY

‘Sordid, Corrupt, Lawless’: Experts Call New Ginni Thomas Revelations ‘Breathtaking’ and Ask ‘What Did Her Husband Know?’

Published

on

The latest revelations about the actions of Ginni Thomas, the far right wing activist, lobbyist, and spouse of a sitting U.S. Supreme Court justice who had unprecedented access to the Trump White House are leading experts to demand Clarence Thomas’ recusal while calling the combination of their actions “breathtaking corruption,” and noting the Justice’s extraordinary hypocrisy.

Later Friday morning The Washington Post reported that Ginni Thomas pressed two Arizona lawmakers to overturn the will of Arizona’s voters in the 2020 presidential election by choosing a “clean” slate of electors, representing Donald Trump and not Joe Biden. The Post notes Thomas did not mention any candidate by name but reports “the context was clear.”

“Before you choose your state’s Electors … consider what will happen to the nation we all love if you don’t stand up and lead,” an email bearing Ginni Thomas’ name, sent to the Arizona lawmakers, reads.

It included a link to a video of a man delivering a message meant for swing-state lawmakers, urging them to “put things right” and “not give in to cowardice.”

“You have only hours to act,” said the speaker, who is not identified in the video.

Thomas also pressed Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows to work to overturn the election, as has been widely reported.

Her efforts, combined with Justice Thomas’ actions on the Supreme Court, amount to “breathtaking corruption,” writes Slate’s legal expert Mark Joseph Stern.

“The conflict of interest between Ginni and Clarence Thomas has never been greater. While Clarence was applying the ‘independent state legislature doctrine’ from the bench, Ginni was using the exact same theory to try to overturn the 2020 election. Just breathtaking corruption,” Stern says.

He adds:

Former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance, now an NBC News/MSNBC legal analyst and law professor, issued a strong warning:

“Either Justice Thomas recuses in every case that comes to the Court where his wife is heavily involved in the action or the public’s confidence in the Court will be damaged beyond repair.”

Reuters reporter covering the U.S. Supreme Court, Lawrence Hurley:

Former federal corruption prosecutor Noah Bookbinder, who is president of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) says it is “outrageous” Justice Thomas has refused to recuse:

“New evidence that Ginni Thomas’s participation in efforts to overturn the 2020 election was even greater than we knew; in this case pressure on AZ legislators to overturn that state’s vote. Makes it even more outrageous that Justice Thomas did not recuse.”

“Wow!” exclaimed Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and former New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof. “Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, pressed Arizona legislators to overturn Biden’s win and choose a ‘clean slate of electors.’ In other words, she supported a coup to overthrow an elected president. What did her husband know?”

Economist and frequent political commentator David Rothschild observes, “Ginni Thomas was conspiring with high ranking Republicans to overturn [the] republic, and her husband was either privy to or actively involved in this conspiracy before using his position to coverup his wife’s role.”

Former SDNY Asst. U.S. Attorney Richard Signorelli sums up:

 

Image by Gage Skidmore via Flickr and a CC license

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.