Conservative Supreme Court Judge Amy Coney Barrett does not seem to tend to abolish marriage equality, but can it be trusted?
Barrett calls the right to marry “essential” in his new book, Listening to the Law: Reflections on Court and Constitution, which appears on Tuesday. However, she said earlier that this issue should meet every state. And in his confirmation hearing in 2020 ROE before wade, who guaranteed the right to have an abortion across the country, but in 2022. She voted to eliminate her.
Meanwhile, members of the National Conference of Conservatism were held this week in Washington, DC discussed a possible change OBEGEFELL V. Hodges, 2015 The Supreme Court’s decision, which determined the equality of marriage in each state.
In his book, Barrett writes: “The court ruled that the right to marry, get involved in sexual intimacy, use birth control and raise children is essential, but the right to do business, commit suicide and abortion.”
Norah O’Donnell of CBS News has recently said that she hopes to help readers “understand the law.” This is not just an opinion survey, ”she said.
“You know, what the court is trying to do is see what the American people have decided. And sometimes American people have expressed themselves in the Constitution, which is our fundamental law. Sometimes in the articles of association,” she said. “However, the court should not impose its values for the American people. It is for the democratic process.”
During approval meetings, Barrett avoided his opinion on marriage equality. However, she had previously suggested that this should be decided by the state.
Former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton recently said she expects the Supreme Court of 6-3 a conservative majority Obergefell. “It took 50 years to flip Roe before Wadeshe told Jessica Tarlov Five Podcast interviews. “The Supreme Court will hear the gay marriage. My forecast is that they will do gay marriage what they have done to the abortion. They will send it back to the states.”
Kim Davis, a former secretary of Rowan County Kentucky last month, asked the Supreme Court to hear her case difficult Obergefell. Conservative Christian Davis completely refused to issue marriage licenses after a ruling so that she would not have to release them to same -sex couples. The judges of the Higher Court did not say whether they would take the case.
Some political observers disagree with Clinton, saying that the Supreme Court is unlikely to want to review the equality of marriage again, even if two ultra -conservatives – Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito – said they would like to abolish it.
Gene Rossi, a former federal prosecutor, said Newsweek Those Barrett comments in her book and CBS show that she is “not inclined to abolish the right to the same sex.” She sometimes contradicted other Conservative judges.
“When it comes to whether other judges are sharing the obvious opinion, I am even more likely that at least Judge Tom will not agree with her,” Rossi added. “After all, my forecast is that most of the court will keep the court firm and retain the right to marriage of same -sex persons.”
O’Donnell interview with barrett will appear further CBS Sunday morning 9 am Sunday and 11 p.m. CBS News around the clock.
If the court has annulled Obergefell2022 President Joe Biden would sign some protection against the marriage law signed by law. This requires the recognition of the federal same -sex and the intercostal marriages and requires the state to recognize the ones in other states. However, no state should offer equal marriage rights.
In addition to Davis, there are other right -wing forces that would like the order to be reversed. On Thursday, the participants of the National Conference of Conservatism, “Inverted Obversk Obergefell”, depicted marriage equality as a source of many societal misfortunes, including damage to children, which has denied numerous research.
“It has been undoubtedly clear in the last 10 years: we can either recognize gay marriages or we can recognize the child’s right to mother and father. We cannot do both,” says Anti-LGBTQ+ activist Katy Faust, according to the event The Washington Times. “If we want to take over the legal marriage, we emphasize the true victims, the children starving the love of the mother or the homeland, which the predators purchased, are mass -made, traded through the borders, fighting identity confusion that were risky at home.”
“If an adult can collect sperm, egg and uterus – and ‘intend to enliven your child, they get a baby,” she said. “Biologically or not.
“At a time when the state has the power to attribute parenting to strangers, it can eliminate it from you,” she added. “Your legal relationship with the children you were born are weaker than it was a decade ago. Don’t be mistaken. The gay marriage did it.”
Jeff Shafer, director of the conservative thoughts group Hale Institute, said that “Obergefell requires gender neutralization of indelible gender legal standards. Everything OBEGEFELL’S The Audacity was to cross the cultural column defining and focused on the entire legal system. ‘
The Orthodox Rabbi Ilan Feldman put in: “Marriage is not to re -define. This is a plan of God’s world,” ignoring that the US is not theocracy and that different faiths have different ideas for marriage.
Another jury was John Eastman, a longtime Anti-LGBTQ+ activist, a close ally of Donald Trump. He was forced to resign from a law professor at the University of Chapman for his role in the rally, which took place in 2021. January 6 The US Capitol uprising, and he was fired. However, he is still trying to divorce equality.
He said he was encouraged by the fact that after Davis filed a request to the Supreme Court, the court asked a couple of gays who had filed a claim for a denial of her marriage license. She wants to avoid them for damages as well as the court’s annulment Obergefell.
According to the conference, the reply request shows that the Supreme Court is interested in the case The Washington Times, Although he believes that the court may limit himself to the concerns of religious freedom. “We should be very clear in Kim Davis’s case that it was not that the couple could have obtained a marriage certificate by care Obergefell “They got one,” he added. – It was her receipt, despite her religious contradiction. It was a step of Orwellian Bendis. ‘
This article initially appeared a lawyer: Amy Cone Barrett, Conservative Commission members discuss the abolition of marriage equality