Supreme Court, with Justice Barrett, to hear major LGBT rights case day after election
Source: CNBC
The Supreme Court is set to hear a case concerning the rights of gay and lesbian Americans on Wednesday morning in a dispute that advocates are warning could pierce holes in the nations anti-discrimination laws.
Arguments, which will take place just a day after the presidential election, will mark the first major fight to come before Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who was sworn in a week ago.
Religious rights activists are pushing for the court to use the case, Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, to overturn a 30-year-old precedent that has for decades mediated the balance between freedom of conscience and the rights of minority groups.
Doing so could effectively reverse the courts trend in recent years of advancing protections for LGBT people, civil rights advocates warn. The case could also weaken laws protecting other groups, including Jews, Muslims and Mormons.
Read more: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/02/supreme-court-to-hear-major-lgbt-rights-case-day-after-election.html
groundloop
(11,527 posts)world wide wally
(21,757 posts)bullimiami
(13,108 posts)It will always exploit some loophole that they will use to void it rather than coming right out and asserting that some group is inferior.
My idea. Overwhelm them with legislation. All individual laws that stand alone.
No more of this omnibus business.
think Obamacare as 25 separate laws.
25x as hard to strike down.
Gay rights. Equal rights. Marriage equality. Bam bam.
Preexisting, Lifetime caps, children to 26. Bam bam bam.
They dont take that many cases.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)to toss LBGTQ rigbts in the trashcan.
Behind the Aegis
(54,019 posts)Marthe48
(17,047 posts)I can't imagine their constant anxiety. Christ, why can't the control freak jerks let it alone already.
They_Live
(3,241 posts)whether they realize it or not.
DeminPennswoods
(15,290 posts)she served on the board of a school, which some of her children attend, that discriminates against LBGTQ students.
There is no evidence she disagreed with or tried to change the discriminatory policy from her position on the board.
roamer65
(36,747 posts)then we take aim at the SC.
Kill the filibuster and add justices.
PERIOD.
Solly Mack
(90,792 posts)OneCrazyDiamond
(2,032 posts)is it just me?