US Supreme Court hands conservatives devastating losses on LGBT, guns & immigration

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

Quote

On Monday, Scalia’s replacement Justice Neil Gorsuch and fellow conservative John Roberts sided with the court’s four liberal justices to extend workplace discrimination protections to gay, lesbian, and transgender employees in a surprise 6-3 decision. The six justices ruled that the 1964 Civil Rights Act’s prohibition of discrimination based on “sex” extends to sexual orientation as well.

Quote

Gorsuch’s opinion was clear: nobody may be fired for “traits or actions” that would not be “questioned in members of a different sex.”

Quote

LGBT advocates cheered the decision, and one would think that most conservatives would accept a simple ban on unjust dismissals.

Quote

 

Alito argued that by conflating “sex” with “sexual orientation and gender identity” in an employment statute, similar laws surrounding issues of “sex” will be interpreted the same. Transgender people, he wrote, will now “be able to argue that they are entitled to use” bathrooms and locker rooms reserved for one gender. Likewise, he argued that religious schools and universities may no longer be able to legally segregate dorm rooms, healthcare providers may be forced to cover sex-reassignment surgery, and employers and teachers may be punished for addressing their employees and students by incorrect pronouns.

Democrats have thus far failed to pass the Equality Act, a piece of legislation that would grant these provisions. Joining Alito in dissent, Justice Brett Kavanaugh claimed that the court’s ruling “usurps the role of Congress,” codifying the Equality Act’s provisions without any debate. In effect, Mitch McConnell’s court passed what Mitch McConnell’s Senate had blocked. 

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.rt.com/usa/491918-supreme-court-discrimination-sex/

 

 

Quote

 

Court turns down government’s “sanctuary state” petition

 

After considering a major case involving immigration — this time, an effort by the federal government to invalidate one of California’s so-called “sanctuary state” laws — at 12 consecutive conferences, the justices declined to add the case to their docket. Passed in 2017, S.B. 54 (known as the California Values Act) prohibits state and local law enforcement officials from cooperating with federal immigration officials – for example, by providing information about individuals in custody, or transferring inmates in their custody to federal immigration authorities. 

 

 

https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/06/court-turns-down-governments-sanctuary-state-petition/

 

 

 

Quote

 

After long wait, court spurns gun-rights challenges

 

In late April the Supreme Court sent a challenge to the constitutionality of New York City’s ban on the transport of handguns outside the city back to the lower court without ruling on whether the ban was constitutional. By a vote of 6-3, the justices concluded that the case was moot – that is, no longer a live controversy – because the city had changed the rule last year. In a concurring opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh suggested that the lower courts “may not be properly applying” the Supreme Court’s most recent gun rights rulings, and he recommended that the justices take up another Second Amendment case “soon.”

 

https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/06/after-long-wait-court-spurns-gun-rights-challenges/

 

No massive impacts but it definitely calls into question how "conservative" Roberts and Gorsuch really are. 

 

I find the LGBT one agreeable (I know religious conservatives won't, and I feel for them), the problem is the inevitable far reaching way it will be expanded and lawsuits demanding far more. The dropped cases hurt (immigration should've definitely been taken up as it's an easy side with the federal government), but can be remedied by taking bigger cases with more reach. 

Edited June 15, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

I can tell you after I had looked through Gorsuch's background and Roberts, the LGBT case doesn't surprise me from Roberts. 

 

However, for Gorsuch this is a monumental shift. It's impossible to believe he just magically had a revelation that pitches him against the very churches he's a part of. What this seems like to me is that Gorsuch feels pressure from certain social groups and feels threatened that if he doesn't capitulate, he'll likely be socially harmed, if not physically. This was the intended consequence of battering the conservative justices in the Senate hearings. Not necessarily to prevent them from taking the seat. As you can see, Roberts is quite easy to tip over with the most minuscule amount of pressure.