Contents:
- FIRG OF GAY CATHOLIC SCHOOL TEACHER ULD TT LATT SUPREME COURT LG
- FORMER DOJ LAWYER UTTERLY BAFFLED BY SUPREME COURT’S REASONG IN GAY RIGHTS CASE: ‘THERE WAS NO REAL ISSUE’
FIRG OF GAY CATHOLIC SCHOOL TEACHER ULD TT LATT SUPREME COURT LG
Image source, Getty ImagThe US Supreme Court over the past several s has slowly but steadily expand s protectns of gay rights. From strikg down a Texas law that crimalised "sodomy" to legalisg gay marriage across the natn, the directn of US jurispnce seemed was before Jtice Anthony Kennedy, the thor of several of those landmark cisns, retired and Donald Tmp, wh two appotments, gave the urt a cidly more nservative bent. There was some ncern among LGBT advot that the newly posed urt would e this year's two high-profile gay and transgenr rights s to take the natn a different ncerns proved unfound.
Neil Gorsuch, one of the Tmp appote, wrote the sweepg cisn that extend feral employment protectns to gay and transgenr workers.
While the urt is tablishg a long history of cisns expandg gay rights, this is the first time spoke directly about the legal protectns for transgenr dividuals. Acrdg to the Texas judicial missn’s 2019 warng, Hensley referred gay upl who wanted her to pri over their marriage ceremony to other people who would officiate.
FORMER DOJ LAWYER UTTERLY BAFFLED BY SUPREME COURT’S REASONG IN GAY RIGHTS CASE: ‘THERE WAS NO REAL ISSUE’
“The worry is that this provis a green light to any bs owner that they n refe service to any person on the basis of their inty, whether they’re gay or lbian, or Jewish or Black, or anythg, bee they have an objectn to those sorts of people beg their bs, ” said Kathere Franke, a profsor at Columbia Law School. In 2020, Gorsuch livered a massive w to the LGBTQ muny when he livered the majory opn a se that extend feral protectns to gay, lbian and transgenr workers. Supreme Court cisn favor of a web signer who did not want to work for gay upl bolsters s fight the U.
Court of Appeals for the 4th Circu Richmond is an early tt of how that major Supreme Court cisn ptg ee speech agast anti-discrimatn laws will play out beyond the hypothetil suatn that se, which volved a platiff who had never actually ma weddg webs or been asked to do so by a gay person. “The Court rejected the dissent’s assertn that s cisn opened the door to discrimatn employment, ” ACLU attorney Josh Block wrote a reply to Becket’s the exampl raised the Supreme Court did not clu a relig anizatn or a gay employee, and Gorsuch repeatedly voked a 2000 cisn allowg the Boy Suts to expel a gay volunteer on “exprsive associatn” grounds.