SCOTUS rules that civil rights law protects gay and transgender employees: Roberts and Gorsuch?

I can hear it now....

"Fatty (William Barr), you have to do something about this rogue Justice Gorsuch. Doesn't he know he is loyal to ME? Raise money, something to get him voted out so he doesn't win re-election!!"

ugh

 

Under Gorsuch's precedent set here, in the case of Trump's taxes, he should be ruling in favor of Congress. If he believes in the text of the law on its face "Shall" means Shall.

Glad to see there's actually some semblance of normal logical governance still left in this country, but honestly this should have been 9-0. Not being able to "Discriminate based on Sex, race, etc." should be pretty straight forward. If the text read "discriminate based on your sex, whether it be male or female"... then that would be different. But the text is that to where Sex should be Sex. You should be able to sue, and have the merits of individual cases be brought to lower courts. Keep in mind that that's really all Gorsuch is saying here.... that you can sue.... NOT that you cannot fire a gay person. That fact alone should dictate a 9-0 decision in a normal court with actual judges, and not right wing activists.

What the Trump regime was trying to say in the highest level of court is that you CANNOT even bring a lawsuit in court if you are a fired because you are gay. The need to go all the way to the Supreme Court to try and overturn Civil and Human Rights against our own citizens should be the main story here. It's extreme, and frankly hateful on its face.

 

There's a legitimate legal argument made by the minority. I haven't read it yet and I'm far from a legal scholar, but I do read many supreme court rulings as part of what I research. Anyhow, legislative history, the intent of lawmakers, and other extratextual considerations have always carried weight to varying levels, depending on the Justice and depending on the case. This is far from a 9-0 slam dunk.

 

I read Alito's dissension and he basically says that it wasn't the court's responsibility to make the distinction between "sex" and "sexual identity" or "gender fluidity." Since the decision was based on Title VII, which was written in 1964, it should have been up to Congress to clarify this (and he stated that they had opportunities, but laws hadn't passed in the chambers as of yet). He went on to say that when the law was written in 1964, no one was thinking that "sex" meant "sexual identity' or "gender fluidity." He then went on to basically chide the members who voted for it for not sticking to the text and then trying to say that they were.

 

Happy belated birthday Mr. Trump.

 

...heehee...

...that's like saying there weren't any gay people in the United States in 1964...
...just because nobody (...and here, you'd have to identify who "nobody" is, exactly) thought that "sex" and "sexual identity" were attributably the same...

...doesn't mean that they weren't.

This isn't discovery. This is revelation.

...and no, it certainly wouldn't have been a 9-0 decision by the court on this...
...more "original intent" arguments, that do more to betray the original intent of the law, as it was written and for what intended purpose, that needed someone shining a bright enough light on them to show how silly they were originally....and now....

 

Trump said what most people have believed to be true........ but it really rubbed "Learned Hand" John Roberts the wrong way.

I will be curious to see where the court is in ten years.

 

kavabaugh should just have alito and thomas provide his votes. That way he will have more time to drink and molest women...

 

This is great news and a breath of fresh air for a country that desperately needed it.

Confidence in government feels like its at an all-time low with a woefully inept President, dysfunctional congress, corrupt justice department, an ailing police force and a pandemic that’s wrecking havoc across the nation.

Today, with Gorsuch leading the way, we actually managed to get something right.

The LGBT community needs these type of protections. Anti-gay biases are still very much a real thing, trust me. As I understand it, today’s decision leaves wiggle room for the “religious liberty” people to still illogically discriminate. At least it will be a little harder for them to do so now.

 

Quoting just so that this gets shown again...LOL

 

Yet, I assume he is willing to keep the 1700s definition of well armed militia

 

Might be a loss for bigots, but I don't know why it's one for Trump. He uses that **** like a dog treat for his base.

And because "something out of his control" worked against he (but "he tried"), it gives him an excuse to be even nastier with executive orders to score him more points.

Media's use of the scoreboard is inaccurately dumb and misleading. Ofc, they define the scoreboard with their daily commentary but it means jack **** to voters. The tweeter parsing it to frame it as a Trump loss is likely framed as a dog treat for his readers.

It's a victory for lgbt and civil rights activists, and it's a loss gay hating evangelicals and their ilk.

 

Honestly.... Trump is a guy who has lived in NY all his life, and has been around gay people for years. He could probably care less about this one. This was driven by both his evangelical nutcase donors like Jerry Followill and his large corporate donors who want nothing more than another shredding of rights to sue employers for discrimination. Those same companies that are all like "Black Lives Matter.... Diversity is great!!.. Women empowered... yada yada" are given millions to Trump to try and destroy laws to protect workers, and to save them just a little bit more in legal fees.

Trump is just a vessel for those billionaire oligarchs. Now on black people who aren't massive celebrities.... Trump is a known racist, and just a hate filled human being. But I doubt he cares about the gay community. If you know Trump like most of his base doesn't know him, you know where he's truly dangerous and what he is a hate filled jerk towards. I doubt he cares much about losing this one honestly.

 

I'm impressed with how Justice Gorsuch wrote his opinion for the majority. It is both straight forward and elegant. I'll be surprised if he doesn't piss me off at some point, but right now, my opinion of him has gone up considerably. His decision gives the ruling far more impact than it would have had if it had been a 5-4 vote with Roberts carrying the day. Kudos to both conservative justices.

 

You can summarize Trump's life in that first tweet:

"I've read the decision, and some people were surprised"

 

People will get fed up even more if Roberts plays daddy tiebreaker all the time, but that's the way the court has shifted...

 

Gorsuch in the majority opinion even said that the writers of the law in 1964 might not have meant that either. This was a view of taking a broader sense of the term as we understand now. Gorsuch might be a textualist but he isn't an Originalist.

 

From what I've read about Trump is that he doesn't really care about homosexuality. His political opposition is playing to his base and that he has no principles other than what benefits him and his family.