• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

RVA Mag

Richmond, VA Culture & Politics Since 2005

Menu RVA Mag Logo
  • community
  • MUSIC
  • ART
  • EAT DRINK
  • GAYRVA
  • POLITICS
  • PHOTO
  • EVENTS
  • MAGAZINE
RVA Mag Logo
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contributors
  • Sponsors

Head of Right Wing Group That Spent Millions on Gorsuch Mocked for Fury Over LGBTQ Rights Opinion

New Civil Rights Movement | June 17, 2020

Topics: anti-LGBTQ discrimination, Carrie Severino, Civil Rights Act, Judicial Crisis Network, LGBTQ rights, Neil Gorsuch, US Supreme Court

Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, a Trump appointee, wrote the majority opinion protecting LGBTQ rights in the workplace, and the head of a right-wing group that fought to have him appointed is very very angry.

The head of a far right wing activist group is furious conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote Monday’s majority Supreme Court opinion that finds discriminating against LGBTQ workers is illegal.

Judicial Crisis Network, a “powerful dark money group pushing [the] court to right,” ran a $10 million campaign in 2017 to force Gorsuch onto the bench. He is President Donald Trump’s first Supreme Court nominee. The group also spent $1 million to block President Barack Obama from putting Merrick Garland on the bench.

In a series of tweets, Carrie Severino blasted Justice Gorsuch and the five others who sided with his opinion. She even claims they are merely trying to appeal to college students by finding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination.

Gorsuch, a textualist who replaced Justice Antonin Scalia on the bench, decided that as written, the actual words of the Civil Rights Act make clear that discriminating on the basis of sex is illegal.

Severino, who also happens to be married to Roger Severino, a far right wing religious activist who heads the Dept. of Health and Human Services Office of Civil Rights under Trump, is furious.

Justice Scalia would be disappointed that his successor has bungled textualism so badly today, for the sake of appealing to college campuses and editorial boards.

This was not judging, this was legislating—a brute force attack on our constitutional system. (1/x)

— Carrie Severino (@JCNSeverino) June 15, 2020

Have no doubts about what happened today: This was the hijacking of textualism.

You can't redefine the meaning of words themselves and still be doing textualism. This is an ominous sign for anyone concerned about the future of representative democracy. (end)

— Carrie Severino (@JCNSeverino) June 15, 2020

President Trump and his administration oppose rights for LGBTQ workers and actively lobbied to have the Court rule discrimination is legal.

On social media many – including some conservatives – are mocking her.

Dang, too bad the justice you guys bought isn't a far-right extremist 100% of the time. https://t.co/WVHS2K6UNe

— Alex Kotch (@alexkotch) June 15, 2020

The reason why conservative dark money groups like JCN spend millions of dollars on judicial nominations ($10 million+ for Gorsuch alone!) is because they want to guarantee conservative legal outcomes. It didn't work today, and they're pissed. https://t.co/Na3MiKClkK

— Meagan Hatcher-Mays (@importantmeagan) June 15, 2020

Yes, a man with a lifetime appointment and guaranteed salary of more than $250,000/year even after he retires felt the need to cater to college campuses and editorial boards. This makes complete and total sense.

— Dan. B (@forensics409) June 15, 2020

Cry me a river pic.twitter.com/zxfU4vcMFu

— Rick Hasen (@rickhasen) June 15, 2020

INCONVENIENT FACT: Justice Scalia was one of the most "activist" judges ever to sit on the Supreme Court.

In District of Columbia v. Heller, Scalia wrote the majority opinion that overturned 200 years of 2nd Amendment law just because it suited his right-wing, pro-NRA views. https://t.co/BYWVVit1yh

— Mrs. Betty Bowers (@BettyBowers) June 15, 2020

Looks like using "textualism" as a cover for bigotry didn't work this time. Sad for you.

— Scott Tobias (@scott_tobias) June 15, 2020

"Textualism" is just an excuse to discriminate against people they hate. https://t.co/93BRWm8047

— Marc Love (@marcslove) June 15, 2020

Thoughts and prayers for the right-wing activists who thought they had installed only fellow bigots onto the bench. https://t.co/C1d4PIFL6B

— Hemant Mehta (@hemantmehta) June 15, 2020

Carrie Severino, right wing judicial activist and spouse of HHS OCR director who last week issued a discriminatory HHS rule that was invalidated by today's SCOTUS decision, is upset about Gorsuch's textualist argument https://t.co/aEUU9YDDKQ

— Tim Fitzsimons (@tfitzsimons) June 15, 2020

bigots like carrie invent sophisticated and academic excuses to rationalize their bigotry. the same people saying this justified dred scott v. sandford. and those same people justified plessy v. ferguson.

bigots always find a way to frame their intolerance as intellectualism. https://t.co/A6TbSvpFmb

— brent (@brent858) June 15, 2020

Written by David Badash, The New Civil Rights Movement. Photo via NCRM

Sen. Mark Warner says he’ll vote against Neil Gorsuch in SCOTUS battle

RVA Staff | April 3, 2017

Topics: community, Mark Warner, Neil Gorsuch

Democratic Virginia Sen. Mark Warner has found himself on the front lines in the fight against President Trump’s executive actions and we can now add the nomination of a new Supreme Court Justice to the list.

In a statement sent out this morning, Warner (top image left) said he was worried about the future of the Senate if the so called “nuclear option” was used. This maneuver, which would required Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to change the rules to deny any future filibusters for Supreme Court nominations, could have “lasting consequences” on the Senate, according to Warner.

But SCOTUS nominee Neil Gorsuch (top image right), who’s been compared philosophically to his replacement Antonin Scalia, didn’t do enough to sway Warner during last week’s confirmation hearings.

“Despite his impressive academic credentials, Judge Gorsuch’s record and evasive responses – even refusing to answer questions regarding his views of cases like Roe v. Wade and Citizens United – do not give me confidence that he possesses a judicial philosophy that will serve the American public well,” Warner said.

For a bit more insight into the recent Gorsuch hearings check out the Daily Show’s breakdown here –

The first vote on Gorsuch is happening as I type this, with a full floor vote expected to shortly follow. Republicans need 60 votes to avoid the “nuclear option” and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has promised as slow the process any way his party can. But if they do, Republicans only need 51 votes to change the rules and they currently have 52 seats.

‎

sidebar

sidebar-alt

Copyright © 2021 · RVA Magazine on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Close

    Event Details

    Please fill out the form below to suggest an event to us. We will get back to you with further information.


    OR Free Event

    CONTACT: [email protected]