Conservative Supreme Court Judge Amy Connie Barrett doesn’t seem to have a tendency to overturn marriage equality, but is she trustworthy?
Keep up with the latest LGBTQ+News and politics. Sign up for our supporters email newsletter.
Barrett calls the right to marry “basics” in her new book, Listen to the Law: Reflections of the Courts and the Constitution; It will be announced on Tuesday. But she previously said the issue should be left to the states. And at the 2020 confirmation hearing, she was Cage about whether she would vote to fall. Roev. Wade, Although she guaranteed the right to abortion nationwide, in 2022 she voted to overturn it.
Meanwhile, panelists at the National Conservatism Conference held in Washington, DC this week discussed a possible reversal of the Obergefellv. Hodges, A 2015 Supreme Court decision that established marriage equality in all states.
In her book, Barrett wrote: “The court has determined that the right to marry, engage in sexual intimacy, use birth control and raise children is fundamental, but the right to do business, commit suicide and get an abortion is fundamental.”
Barrett recently told Nora O’Donnell CBS News That she hopes to help readers “understand the law.” It’s not just a poll,” she said.
“You know, what the courts are trying to do is see what the American people have decided, and sometimes the American people have expressed that it is the constitution itself, our fundamental law, sometimes by law,” she said. “But courts should not impose Americans their own values, because of the democratic process.”
Barrett circumvented her views on marriage equality during the confirmation hearing. However, she previously suggested that it should be state-by-state decisions.
Former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton recently said he expects the Supreme Court, which has a conservative 6-3 majority, will be overturned. Obergefell. “It took me 50 years to fall Roev. WadeShe told Jessica Tallov Five In a podcast interview. “The Supreme Court will hear cases about gay marriages. My prediction is to do what they have aborted against gay marriages. They will send it back to America.”
Last month, Kim Davis, a former clerk in Rowan County, Kentucky, asked the Supreme Court to hear her case become challenging. Obergefell. A conservative Christian, Davis stopped issuing marriage licenses in full after the award, so there is no need to issue them to same-sex couples. High Court judges won’t say whether they will take the case or not.
Some political observers oppose Clinton and say the Supreme Court doesn’t want to revisit marriage equality.
Former federal prosecutor Jean Rossi said Newsweek Barrett’s comments on her book and CBS show that she “has no tendency to overturn the right to same-sex marriage.” She was sometimes against other conservative justice.
“I further speculate that at least Judge Thomas would not agree with her as to whether other justices share her obvious views,” Rossi added. “In the end, my prediction is that the majority of courts will endure firmly and maintain the right to same-sex marriage.”
O’Donnell’s interview with Barrett will air CBS Sunday Morning Sunday at 9am and 11am CBS News 24/7.
If the court overthrows Obergefellthere is some degree of protection from marriage respect, signed into law by President Joe Biden in 2022. It requires a federal recognition of same-sex and interracial marriage, and requires the state to recognize what has been done in other states. However, there is no need to provide equal marriage rights.
In addition to Davis, there are other right-wing forces who want to see control turn around. On the panel of the “Obergefell” panel at the National Conservatism Conference on Thursday, participants portrayed marriage equality as a source of many social illnesses, including harm to children, something exposed by many studies.
“The last decade has done one undeniably clear: you can recognize gay marriages or your child’s rights to mothers and fathers. You can’t do both,” says anti-LGBTQ+ activist Katy Faust. Washington Times. “If we regain a legal marriage, we will emphasize real victims, motherly or paternal love-hungry children, acquire predators, mass-produced, trafficked across borders, suffer from disruption in identity, and be exposed to dangerous households.”
“If adults can assemble sperm, eggs and uterus, they can ‘intention’ to give birth to the baby” to try to make the child a parent. She said. “Whether it is biologically related. Whether it is pedophile or not. Whether it is a retired person or not. Whether it is a foreigner or not.
“The moment the nation has the power to assign parent-child relationships to strangers, it can assign it from you.” She added. “Your legal relationship with the children you created is weaker than it was 10 years ago. There’s no mistake. Gay marriage did that.”
Jeff Schafer, director of the Hale Institute, a conservative think tank; I said that “Obergefell Gender neutralization of meaningless sexual standards is necessary. The overall point of Obergefell’s Audacity was to define the entire legal framework and defeat the cultural pillars that passed. ”
Orthodox Rabby Lanfeldman Put it in, “Marriage is not something we redefine. It’s God’s plan for the world,” the United States ignores not theocracy, but different faiths have different ideas about marriage.
Another of the panel was a close ally of longtime anti-LGBTQ+ activist John Eastman and Donald Trump. He was forced to resign as Law Professor at Chapman University on January 6, 2021, due to his role in a rally ahead of the U.S. Capitol Rebellion, and he was denied. However, he is still trying to end marriage equality.
He said he was encouraged by the fact that after Davis filed her request with the Supreme Court, the court sought a response from a gay couple who sued her about denial of their marriage license. She not only wants to ensure they don’t pay damages, she also wants to overturn the court. Obergefell.
The request for response indicates that the High Court is interested in the case, he said at the meeting. Washington Times, Though he believes the courts could be limited to concerns about religious freedom. “We should be very clear in the Kim Davis case, not that a couple can get a marriage certificate. Obergefell – They got one,” he added. It was Orwell’s bend. ”
Source: Advocate.com – www.advocate.com
