Editorial: Could Supreme Court LGBT Ruling Impact Christian Right Voting?

Donald Trump, darling of the Christian Right, was elected in large part because he promised them that every day would be Christmas for their political and religious agendas. In return, the Christian Right has been willing to overlook, excuse, and rationalize virtually all of who Donald Trump is, as they have kept their eyes on that prize. But this week, evangelicals had a disappointing and ironic surprise when two of “their” appointed judges sided with the four liberal judges in a 6-3 ruling to protect LGBTQ employees from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or transgender identity

During his 2016 presidential campaign, Trump promised to advance the Christian Right platforms opposing abortion, same-sex marriage, and LGBTQ rights and protections. And whether Trump actually said as much, he had them convinced that he would “make America great again” largely by making America an evangelical Christian theocracy. He promised the fulfillment of their wishes in large part by his vow to fill the Supreme Court seat vacated by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death with a conservative justice who would protect their values.

Eighty-one percent of white evangelicals voted for Trump in 2016. In the election exit poll, 21 percent of all voters considered Supreme Court appointments to be the most important factor in how they voted. Of those, 56 percent voted for Trump. They wanted conservative judges whom they could count on to make judgments that protected their values, and they put their trust in Trump and the Republicans to appoint the right judges. Trump kept his promise to appoint a Supreme Court justice who they felt had their backs when he appointed Neil M. Gorsuch to replace Scalia.

On Monday, however, Justice Gorsuch, along with Chief Justice John Roberts, sided with the liberal justices in their ruling that the 1964 Civil Rights Act protects gay, lesbian, and transgender employees from discrimination based on sex. It was Justice Gorsuch, in fact, who wrote the majority opinion.

“Today,” Gorsuch said, “we must decide whether an employer can fire someone simply for being homosexual or transgender. The answer is clear.”

The ruling is a victory for the LGBTQ community. Some (though not the religious right) would see it as a hopeful sign on another front, as well: It was a loss for the Trump administration, who had sided with the employers in three cases involving members of the LGBTQ community who had lost their jobs. Consequently, no longer can Trump and the religious right take for granted that all conservative SCOTUS justices are in their pocket and will automatically take the side of the religious right, just because it is the side of the religious right.

As Washington Post columnist Henry Olsen writes, “Now that Gorsuch has proved himself untrustworthy in their eyes, they would be right to question whether Republican assurances meant anything at all.”

The Christian Right’s previous defenses of Trump, even when they have found him otherwise repugnant, have always been based on the fact that his various legislative actions favored them, and more importantly, he got them their judges. Now, however, they’ve discovered that even some conservative judges may disappoint them by basing decisions on legal merits rather than on making Trump supporters happy. What will this mean in the 2020 election for those conservatives and swing voters who voted for Trump on the basis of SCOTUS picks Christian Right-slanted legislation?

Why Supreme Court’s LGBTQ employment discrimination ruling marks a ‘milestone’ | PBS NewsHour  [2020-06-15]

Why evangelical Christians still support President Trump despite controversies | CBS News  [2018-03-28]

Democrats Seek Kavanaugh’s Impeachment Following New Reporting

Democrats are now seeking impeachment of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who was confirmed in 2018 despite multiple allegations of sexual misconduct. On Sunday, Democrats called for a new investigation following a recent New York Times piece by journalists Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, who have been examining last year’s accusations against Kavanaugh while doing research for their forthcoming book, The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation. 

In addition to Christine Blasey Ford, who testified that Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her during high school, Deborah Ramirez, a Yale classmate of Kavanaugh’s, also accused Kavanaugh in 2018 of sexual assault. Ramirez alleged that while both were students at Yale, Kavanaugh exposed himself to her, and forced her to touch his penis as she tried to avoid him.

Ramirez did not testify in 2018, and even though she and her attorneys presented the FBI with 25 witnesses, the Justice Department did not follow up with any of them.

In 2018, Kavanaugh denied Ramirez’ allegation, saying that if it had taken place, it would have been the talk of the campus. Evidently, though, it was. 

Though Kavanaugh’s supporters claimed Ramirez’ accusation was uncorroborated, the New York Times reported: 

“At least seven people, including Ms. Ramirez’s mother, heard about the Yale incident long before Mr. Kavanaugh was a federal judge. Two of those people were classmates who learned of it just days after the party occurred, suggesting that it was discussed among students at the time.”

During their investigation, the two Times journalists detailed additional corroborations of Ramirez’ allegations, as well as turning up a witness with an additional allegation that is nearly identical to that of Ramirez.

According to the Times journalists, “A classmate (of Kavanaugh, Ramirez, and the newly revealed additional victim), Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student. Mr. Stier, who runs a nonprofit organization in Washington, notified senators and the F.B.I. about this account, but the F.B.I. did not investigate and Mr. Stier has declined to discuss it publicly.” 

It should be noted that friends of this alleged victim say she does not remember the incident. Stier and others concede that that is often the case with events that take place when one is drunk. 

The Times journalists continue, “(We corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier.)”

Donald Trump continues to support Kavanaugh while blasting those calling for a new investigation: “Now the Radical Left Democrats and their Partner, the LameStream Media, are after Brett Kavanaugh again, talking loudly of their favorite word, impeachment,” Trump tweeted. “He is an innocent man who has been treated HORRIBLY. Such lies about him. They want to scare him into turning Liberal!”

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) tweeted, “Last year the Kavanaugh nomination was rammed through the Senate without a thorough examination of the allegations against him. Confirmation is not exoneration, and these newest revelations are disturbing. Like the man who appointed him, Kavanaugh should be impeached.”

Beto O’Rourke tweeted, “Yesterday, we learned of another accusation against Brett Kavanaugh—one we didn’t find out about before he was confirmed because the Senate forced the F.B.I. to rush its investigation to save his nomination. We know he lied under oath. He should be impeached.”

Multiple other Democrats have tweeted their support of impeachment for Kavanaugh. Though they must surely realize that the chances of impeaching Kavanaugh are slim to none, perhaps going on record in support of impeachment is enough of a message.

NYT reveals new Kavanaugh assault allegation | Newsy [09-15-2019]

Trump rips new claim against Kavanaugh | Fox News [2019-09-15]