• 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

SCOTUS Justice Alito Delivers ‘Tirade’ Claiming Same-Sex Marriage Infringes on Civil Rights of Anti-LGBTQ Americans

Marilyn Drew Necci | November 16, 2020

Topics: Federalist Society, marriage equality, Obergefell v. Hodges, Samuel Alito, US Supreme Court

He dissented on the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in favor of marriage equality, and now he’s furious that anti-marriage equality activists are being called out on their prejudiced views.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito Thursday night in the company of his Federalist Society friends unleashed years of pent-up anger in a speech at the right wing group’s convention.

One of his many targets was the court’s landmark 2015 decision in Obergefell, which found that same-sex couples have the same constitutional rights and responsibilities as their different-sex couples peers. Alito dissented in that 5-4 decision.

Calling it “a grievance-laden tirade,” Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern writes that “Alito abandoned any pretense of impartiality in his speech.” He likens the conservative jurist’s speech to “a burn book for many cases he has participated in, particularly those in which he dissented.”

Alito did not mince words Thursday night, sharing his clear anger and offense as he delivered the keynote address to the Federalist Society 2020 National Lawyers Convention.

“You can’t say that marriage is a union between one man and one woman,” Alito lamented, in a twisted version of the truth. “Until very recently, that’s what the vast majority of Americans thought. Now it’s considered bigotry.”

“That this would happen after our decision in Obergefell should not have come as a surprise,” he continued, noting that he could see “where the decision would lead.”

“I wrote the following: ‘I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes. But if they repeat those views in public, they will risk being labeled as bigots and treated as such by governments employers and schools.’ That is just what is coming to pass.”

“One of the great challenges for the Supreme Court going forward will be to protect freedom of speech,” Alito warns, clearly concerned only for the freedom of speech of his fellow conservatives who oppose equality.

He laments, “that freedom is falling out of favor in some circles. We need to do whatever we can to prevent it from becoming a second tier constitutional right.”

In his Obergefell dissent, Alito warned the Court’s decision would lead to “bitter and lasting wounds.” Five years later, it seems, he meant his own.

Here is Justice Alito complaining that the Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage decision has crushed the free speech of anti-LGBTQ advocates. pic.twitter.com/0eH9QsxMTU

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) November 13, 2020

Written by David Badash, The New Civil Rights Movement. Image via screencap.

Clarence Thomas Pens Scathing Attack Suggesting Same-Sex Marriage Must Be Overturned

New Civil Rights Movement | October 6, 2020

Topics: Clarence Thomas, Kim Davis, marriage equality, Obergefell v. Hodges, religious freedom, US Supreme Court

The opinion, co-authored by fellow Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, made the argument that marriage equality should never have been allowed, because of (you guessed it) “religious freedom.”

Former Rowan County, Kentucky clerk Kim Davis won’t get a hearing from the U.S. Supreme Court. A case against her, brought by several same-sex couples she refused to grant marriage licenses to, was rejected Monday by the country’s top court.

But ultra-conservative Justice Clarence Thomas took the opportunity to attack the court’s landmark Obergefell case, which found the Constitution allows same-sex couples the same rights and responsibilities of marriage as their different-sex peers.

Thomas, who has a direct line into the White House via his activist and lobbyist wife Ginni Thomas, slammed the decision, suggesting the case should be overturned, as Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern reports.

Why?

“Religious liberty.”

Thomas claims Kim Davis “may have been one of the first victims of this Court’s cavalier treatment of religion in its Obergefell decision, but she will not be the last.”

His words are scathing, and a direct assault on equality.

“Due to Obergefell, those with sincerely held religious beliefs concerning marriage will find it increasingly difficult to participate in society without running afoul of Obergefell and its effect on other antidiscrimination laws,” claims Thomas, five years after the decision.

“It would be one thing if recognition for same-sex marriage had been debated and adopted through the democratic process, with the people deciding not to provide statutory protections for religious liberty under state law,” he adds. “But it is quite another when the Court forces that choice upon society through its creation of atextual constitutional rights and its ungenerous interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause, leaving those with religious objections in the lurch.”

At the time of the Obergefell decision, same-sex marriage was supported by six out of 10 Americans.

In the 2015 Obergefell case, Justice Thomas writes, “the Court read a right to same-sex marriage into the Fourteenth Amendment, even though that right is found nowhere in the text.”

Thomas is a textualist, or originalist, adhering to conservatves’ pseudo-theory created in the 1980’s that claims the Constitution is not a living document, written broadly to stand the test of time. Rather, they believe it must be interpreted as the Founders conceived, with the words being interpreted exactly as the document’s authors intended.

(Textualism, or originalism, has been called “a scam” and Thomas has been blasted for “his hypocrisy” surrounding it.)

“Several Members of the Court noted that the Court’s decision would threaten the religious liberty of the many Americans who believe that marriage is a sacred institution between one man and one woman. If the States had been allowed to resolve this question through legislation, they could have included accommodations for those who hold these religious beliefs,” Thomas writes.

“The Court, however, bypassed that democratic process. Worse still, though it briefly acknowledged that those with sincerely held religious objections to same-sex marriage are often ‘decent and honorable,’” he continues, “the Court went on to suggest that those beliefs espoused a bigoted worldview.”

Believing that LGBTQ people are not equal to non-LGBTQ people is the very definition of bigotry.

Justice Thomas uses the word “bigot” four times in his dissent, which was joined by Justice Samuel Alito.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is attempting to force through the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, giving the Court a 6-3 conservative super-majority.

Written by David Badash, The New Civil Rights Movement. Image by Thomas Cizauskas via Flickr and a CC license

In Tennessee, A Fundamentalist Attorney Is Attempting To Undo Marriage Equality

Marilyn Drew Necci | January 16, 2020

Topics: anti-LGBTQ hate groups, David Fowler, Family Action Council of Tennessee, Focus On The Family, marriage equality, marriage licenses, Obergefell v. Hodges, US Supreme Court

By sending letters demanding county clerks cease issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, Tennessee attorney David Fowler is setting the stage for a lawsuit challenging marriage equality in Tennessee and beyond.

Last week, Tennessee attorney David Fowler sent a letter to all 95 of Tennessee’s county clerks demanding that they cease and desist issuing of marriage licenses to same-sex couples. His stated reasoning is that the clerks are violating Tennessee’s constitution.

Tennessee is only one of several states in the US that have anti-marriage equality clauses written into their constitutions; Virginia, as it happens, is another. However, in light of the federal precedent set by the Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision, which made marriage equality the law of the land throughout the US, this should not matter. At the time of that decision, Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery stated that Tennessee was required to abide by the Supreme Court decision regardless of the constitutional provision.

Nonetheless, Fowler is making the attempt to legally block same-sex marriages in Tennessee based on that exact constitutional provision. In an interview with the Washington Blade, Fowler rejected the statement of the Attorney General, stating, “It is indisputable that no court has declared the provision in Tennessee’s Constitution unconstitutional and enjoined its enforcement.” He then cited an obscure 1984 opinion by a previous Attorney General stating that a law must be considered constitutional “until it is declared unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction.”

Of course, Fowler’s point here is invalidated by the fact that both the Supreme Court and Tennessee District Court Judge Aleta Arthur Trauger have released separate injunctions forbidding the enforcement of Tennessee’s constitutional provision against same-sex marriage.

David Fowler in 2012. Photo by Brian Stansberry, CC BY 3.0, via Wikimedia

Fowler, a former Republican state Senator for Tennessee, is in this case serving as general counsel for the Family Action Council of Tennessee’s Constitutional Government Defense Fund. That group is associated with anti-LGBTQ hate group Focus On The Family.

The letter gives a deadline of Feb. 17 for the Tennessee state government to comply with its demands. And while Fowler has not directly stated that he and the group plan to sue Tennessee’s county clerks, he did state in his letter to all 95 clerks that the ministers he represents are considering “what steps should next be taken by them… to be assured that they are not affirming a form of civil marriage contrary to their beliefs.” So legal action may indeed be forthcoming.

This would not be the first time Fowler has attempted legal action to invalidate same-sex marriage in Tennessee. In 2018, he sued Tennessee’s Williamson County, arguing that the Obergefell v. Hodges decision had invalidated all of Tennessee’s state laws concerning religion. That case was dismissed.

Nonetheless, this has to be concerning for the LGBTQ communities of both Tennessee and Virginia, as well as those of any other state with anti-marriage equality clauses still written into their constitution. During the Trump administration, the makeup of the Supreme Court has changed significantly, and there is some concern that a case like Fowler’s, if taken to a high enough court, could reverse the precedent set by Obergefell v. Hodges and bring all those anti-marriage equality clauses back to life.

National Center For Lesbian Rights legal director Shannon Minter dismissed these concerns in an interview with the Washington Blade, saying, “This is a political stunt, not a serious legal threat… If Fowler actually followed through on filing a lawsuit, it would be thrown out. Marriage equality is the law of the land, including in Tennessee.”

For our sakes, let’s hope Minter is correct.

Top Photo by Sixflashphoto, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia

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]