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.

 

Related Topics:
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

‘Let’s Get a Warrant for Her Backyard’: Noem ‘Done Politically’ Right Wing Pundits Say

Published

13 hours ago

on

April 29, 2024

By

South Dakota Republican Governor Kristi Noem‘s bragging about dragging her 14-month old puppy into a gravel pit and shooting her to death because she “hated” the dog is likely the end of her political career, right-wing pundits are now saying.

On Friday when The Guardian broke the news in a preview of Noem’s upcoming book, outrage on the left was immediate, but outrage on the right trickled in, then increased. Even with Noem doubling down, declaring her killing of the puppy (and a goat that same day, same way) happened 20 years ago, people on the right are expressing anger.

A Democratic pollster says 81% of Americans oppose Noem killing her puppy, The Guardian later reported.

“After learning about Gov. Noem’s actions, only 14% consider her to be a good choice for vice president on the Republican ticket. By a 2:1 margin, even Republicans say the governor would not be a good choice (42% vs. 21%),” the pollster, New River Strategies, stated.

READ MORE: Hunter Biden Plans Lawsuit Against Fox News Amid ‘Conspiracy of Disinformation’

Noem’s book, “No Going Back,” to be released May 7, has a number one ranking at Amazon. Publisher Center Street, a Hachette Book Group imprint, also publishes other right-wing politicians including Ben Carson, Newt Gingrich, and Vivek Ramaswamy. Endorsing the book are other right-wingers, including Donald Trump, Fox News’ Rachel Campos-Duffy, athlete and anti-trans activist Riley Gaines, and anti-LGBTQ extremist group creator Chaya Raichik of Libs of TikTok.

On Monday, as Mediaite reported, two Fox News pundits had had it.

Jason Chaffetz, a former GOP Congressman, said, “she just destroyed her political career. I don’t think there’s anybody on any side of the aisle, any human being that thinks it’s acceptable to go to a gravel pit and shoot a dog in the face and kill it when it’s 14 months old. That’s. I mean, that’s just hideous. So she’s done politically, and I’m a friend of hers. I served with her, but politically, there’s no recovering from this.”

Fox News media analyst Joe Concha said, “as a dog owner my whole life,” the story of Noem shooting her dog “absolutely makes my blood boil.”

RELATED: Noem Defends Shooting Her 14-Month Old Puppy to Death, Brags She Has Media ‘Gasping’

“How utterly heartless do you have to be to shoot a 14-month-old dog in the face? Because look, if it wasn’t doing its job on the farm, or is attacking chicken or people, okay, you’re a public figure, or at least you have a platform in some way, shape, or form. Even if you’re a private citizen, you very easily could have posted somewhere, ‘I’m putting my dog up for adoption because maybe it’s not working out here on the ranch,’ and I can guarantee you many people would have raised their hand to take that dog in,” Concha said, adding, “she just destroyed any chance she had of being Donald Trump’s vice president, if she had any chance at all. There’s no going back from this.”

Right wing talk show host Megyn Kelly said Trump is “too smart” to “pick somebody who’s managed to do the impossible and unite Democrats and Republicans alike in their anger for this woman who shot her puppy in the face.”

At the right wing National Review, Jeffrey Blehar writes: “Let’s Get a Warrant for Kristi Noem’s Backyard.”

“I guess I just don’t like people who boast about shooting puppies,” Blehar adds on social media. “And goats. And horses. And who knows what else, until cops have done an aerial scan of the property and gotten a backhoe out to excavate the suspicious piles of dirt.”

 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Far Right Media Outlet Retracts ‘False’ Story About Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels

Published

14 hours ago

on

April 29, 2024

By

A far-right pro-Trump streaming media outlet has retracted what it now states was a “false” story alleging former Trump personal attorney Michael Cohen and adult film star Stormy Daniels had a sexual relationship for years and engaged in an “extortion” conspiracy plot against the ex-president.

The statement and apology from One America News Network (OAN) comes just one day before the New York criminal trial of Donald Trump is set to begin its third week. Cohen is one of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s top witnesses in the case. Defense attorneys are expected to try to attack Cohen’s credibility.

“OAN today has retracted its March 27 article entitled ‘Whistleblower: Avenatti Alleged Cohen­ Daniels Affair Since 2006, Pre-2016 Trump Extortion Plan,’ and is taking it down from all sites and removing it from all social media. This retraction is part of a settlement reached with Michael Cohen. Mr. Avenatti has denied making the allegations. OAN apologizes to Mr. Cohen for any harm the publication may have caused him,” a statement on OAN’s website reads.

It then states in all-caps: “NO PERSON SHOULD RELY ON THE MARCH 27 ARTICLE OR THE ALLEGATIONS CONTAINED THEREIN.”

READ MORE: Hunter Biden Plans Lawsuit Against Fox News Amid ‘Conspiracy of Disinformation’

“The article, quoting a source, falsely claimed that Mr. Cohen and Ms. Daniels ‘were having an affair since 2006’ and that, according to a source, ‘the whole hush money scheme was cooked up by [Mr. Cohen] to extort the Trump Organization before the 2016 election.’ These statements were false. OAN regrets their publication.”

The New York Times reports there are “no monetary damages,” and adds one of Cohen’s attorneys, “Justin Nelson, had represented Dominion Voting Systems in a suit against Fox News that cost that network $787.5 million to settle. Mr. Nelson worked with Mr. Cohen’s longtime lawyer, Danya Perry, in what was a remarkably quick about-face by OAN.”

Danya Perry, also one of Cohen’s attorneys in this case, declared the settlement was “a total vindication for Mr. Cohen — and a warning: Mr. Cohen is telling the truth, and there will be legal consequences for those who lie about him.”

“Mr. Trump has repeatedly attacked Mr. Cohen,” The Times adds, “despite a gag order issued by the judge overseeing the case, Juan M. Merchan, barring him from attacking witnesses and others. Justice Merchan is currently weighing whether Mr. Trump is in contempt of the gag order as a result of that invective.”

READ MORE: Noem Doubles Down With ‘Legal Cover’ For Shooting Her Puppy to Death

“In particular, Mr. Trump has attacked Mr. Cohen’s credibility, which will also be how Mr. Trump’s lawyers approach his former fixer during trial. The story by OAN, which has been a consistent booster of Mr. Trump’s political agenda, bolstered that strategy.”

Cohen called it, “The first apology in a long line of lies about me by media outlets.”

Professor of law, MSNBC legal analyst, and former FBI General Counsel Andrew Weissmann called the settlement a “big win” for the attorneys and Cohen.

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Hunter Biden Plans Lawsuit Against Fox News Amid ‘Conspiracy of Disinformation’

Published

17 hours ago

on

April 29, 2024

By

Attorneys for Hunter Biden have notified Fox News he plans to sue the right-wing cable TV network and its digital entities, after lawyers for the President’s son spent more than a year investigating. Among other issues the letter reportedly mentions Fox News citing a now-indicted former FBI informant, and points to “revenge porn” laws.

The letter, NBC News reports, is dated last week and specifically points to alleged bribery allegations as well as “Fox’s airing of ‘intimate images’ belonging to Hunter Biden that his lawyers claim were ‘hacked, stolen, and/or manipulated’,” that they say violate “Biden’s civil rights as well as copyright law.”

CNN, focusing in the intimate images, reports that “Hunter Biden is demanding that Fox News remove from its platforms sexually explicit images that President Joe Biden’s son says are private, according to a letter obtained by CNN, as part of his strategy to publicly fight back against conservative media.”

“The media outlet aired a mock trial of Hunter Biden on the streaming platform Fox Nation in 2022,” CNN also reports, “focused on the unproven bribery allegations, and published ‘intimate images of Mr. Biden depicting him in the nude as well as engaged in sex acts,’ according to the letter, which demands that Fox immediately remove the series from all streaming platforms.”

READ MORE: Noem Doubles Down With ‘Legal Cover’ For Shooting Her Puppy to Death

“’FOX knows that these private and confidential images were hacked, stolen, and/or manipulated digital material,’ Hunter Biden’s attorneys wrote in the letter, which contained several of the explicit images, some of which were blurred,” CNN adds. “Publishing these images, the attorneys said, violated ‘the majority of states’ laws against the nonconsensual disclosure of sexually explicit images and videos, sometimes referred to as ‘revenge porn’ laws.’ ”

In a statement Hunter Biden’s attorney, Mark Geragos, expanded on the apparently pending lawsuit.

“For the last five years, Fox News has relentlessly attacked Hunter Biden and made him a caricature in order to boost ratings and for its financial gain,” Geragos stated. “The recent indictment of FBI informant Smirnov has exposed the conspiracy of disinformation that has been fueled by Fox, enabled by their paid agents and monetized by the Fox enterprise. We plan on holding them accountable.”

Media Matters last week reported, “Fox News has mentioned Hunter Biden at least 13,440 times since January 3, 2023, when Republicans took control of the House of Representatives after promising to use their power to investigate the business interests of President Joe Biden’s son, according to a Media Matters review.”

“Fox’s on-air coverage of Hunter Biden has … plummeted in recent months,” Media Matters added. “Mentions of the president’s son on the network peaked at 2,356 in July, when his federal plea deal on two misdemeanor counts of failing to pay taxes fell apart, and mentions exceeded 1,300 in four other months, most recently in December.”

READ MORE: Peter Navarro’s Latest Attempt to Get Out of Jail Smacked Down by SCOTUS

Watch CNN’s report below or at this link.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.