BTWI Statement Concerning The SCOTUS Cases

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 8, 2019
Contact Monica Roberts
BTWI Media Chair 346-310-0824
Dee Dee Watters  BTWI President
855-255-8636
media@blacktranswomen.org

BTAC and BTWI along with the entire Black trans community's eyes are turned toward Washington DC on this historic day as a trans rights case is being argued for the first time in our country's history

The question before the SCOTUS is a fundamental one.   Is it legal to fire someone for being transgender?  We At BTAC and BTWI believe the quite obvious answer to that question is an emphatic no and being trans is not a fireable offense..

But where we find ourselves on this historic October 8 day is our humanity and human rights as transgender Americans being under persistent attack by the Trump administration and its reprehensible accomplices. .   

The Harris Funeral Homes vs EEOC case being brought by Aimee Stephens is a case that will not only impact the human rights of the trans community, but one that will negatively impact all Americans if this case is decided incorrectly.

If that happens, it will also disproportionately affect the Black trans community that we proudly serve.   Now that the case has been argued before the SCOTUS, we at BTWI  and BTAC will continue to fight for the humanity and human rights of our community no matter what happens in this case.

Trans rights are undeniably human rights, and we urge the SCOTUS to be on the right side of history and say no to discrimination.  If they don't, then the Roberts Court will forever set in stone the undeniable impression that it is a partisan, unjust body when it comes to the civil rights of Americans.

Major TBLGQ Rights Cases Being Argued At SCOTUS Today

Just wanted to remind the five conservafools on the SCOTUS as they do oral arguments in the two cases that will determine our human rights that  TBLGQ, and especially trans Americans are Americans.

Those cases being argued by the way if you haven't heard are Zarda v. Altitude Express and Bostock vs Clayton County Georgia, which have been consolidated in a single case to determine whether gay peeps can be discriminated against, and Harris Funeral Homes v EEOC, the trans case.

These cases are being argued on the basis of whether Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act applies to anti-TBLGQ discrimination. They will also affect all federal laws banning discrimination on the basis of sex including Title X of the Education Amendments of 1972 and the Fair Housing Act.  Just wanted to leave y'all with this reminder courtesy of the season 2 finale of POSE.

Landmark TBLGQ Discrimination SCOTUS Cases To Be Argued Next Month

If you're wondering why Laverne Cox as she walked the Emmy red carpet with ACLU staff attorney Chase Strangio was carrying a rainbow clutch purse with the October 8 date on it, the words Title VII' and 'Supreme Court' on it, I'm about to tell you why.

When the calendar page flips to October, on the first Monday of the month (October 7), the 2019-2020 Supreme Court session will start.    After they take their traditional photo, the next day on October 8, the justices will hear arguments in three landmark TBLGQ workplace discrimination cases that will have a profound impact on all TBLGQ persons in the United States Those landmark cases will determine whether TBLGQ Americans are covered under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Two of the three cases, Zarda v. Altitude Express and Bostock vs Clayton County Georgia have been consolidated, and will determine whether anti-gay discrimination is a form of sex discrimination.  The late Donald Zarda filed suit against Altitude Express after the skydiver was terminated by them in 2010 for being gay.   Zarda died as the result of a base jumping accident in Switzerland, and his family elected to continue the case.

Gerald Bostock filed suit against Clayton County after he was terminated from his job by Clayton County in 2013 after it reveled to coworkers he’d joined a gay softball league.

Harris Funeral Homes v EEOC is a trans specific case that will determine whether anti-trans discrimination is a form of sex discrimination.   Aimee Stephens was fired by the funeral home in 2014 after informing her employer she was beginning transition
The Sixth Circuit already has positive case law backing up trans workers in previous discrimination cases that conclude anti-trans discrimination is a form of sex discrimination .  The funeral home and the Trump Administration are trying to argue otherwise.
The ACLU is arguing the Zarda and Harris SCOTUS cases, while an Atlanta area legal firm is arguing the Bostock SCOTUS case.
While all these cases are being argued on the basis of whether Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act applies to anti-TBLGQ discrimination, these cases will affect all federal laws banning discrimination on the basis of sex including Title X of the Education Amendments of 1972 and the Fair Housing Act. 

The Trump Administration and the (in)Justice Department are arguing to make it legal to fire LGBTQ workers. If that happens, it won't be just TBLGQ people who are negatively affected by such an unjust ruling. If you are a cis hetero person perceived to be LGBTQ, you could also be fired as well. While I'm hoping that five justices will reject that BS argument, with Kavanaugh and Gorsuch on the Court, it's possible we'll have an adverse 5-4 ruling. Then again we could get one that goes the other way

We won't know for certain until the June end of the SCOTUS 2019-2020 term At that time we will either be celebrating a landmark win, or a legal setback that will add years to our battle for TBLGQ human rights coverage.

I'm hoping and praying it's a landmark win.

SCOTUS Votes To Oppress Trans Troops

Why am I not surprised the four white conservatives and honorary white man Uncle Ruckus Uncle Thomas voted to oppress trans people and side with the Trump misdaministration on their odious trans ban.

Trans people serve in the armed forces of 18 nations, many of them our NATO allies.   The US should be leading in this area, not regressing.  Qualified American trans people who wish to serve our country should be welcomed with open arms, not told we aren't wanted.

There are trans people who wish to serve our country because they have traditions of military service that go back several generations in their families, 

Trans people are choosing military service for many reasons just like cisgender people. 

Forcing trans people to serve with a 'don't ask don't tell' policy didn't work for gay and lesbian troops, and won't work in this regard. 18 nations allow trans military service, including the ability to transition while they are in the military and it does not affect combat readiness or break the bank. 

It will cost far less for trans related medical care than it does to provide Viagra. It will cost an estimated $2-6 million a year for trans related care vs the $45 million that it cost last year to provide Viagra. 

There's also 15,500 trans people serving, some who have already transitioned and serve critical roles in our armed forces. 

Trans people should not only be allowed to serve, they should be allowed to medically transition while on active duty if necessary and have the VA cover trans medical benefits once they leave.

A sad day for this country/.

Senator Kamala Harris vs. Kavanaugh

You TransGriot readers know I love Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) and hope she at least thinks about running for POTUS in 2020.

In the interim, while we wait to see if she does that down the line, she along with Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) are on the Senate Judiciary Committee and handling their senate business barbecuing Brett Kavanaugh's behind.

Check out this eight minute exchange between her and Kavanaugh, who seems to be having selective memory loss in real time

Moni's Thoughts About Justice Kennedy's Retirement

US Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy alarmed many people yesterday after a string of depressing from my perspective 5-4 decisions to announce that he was retiring from the SCOTUS.

It's bad news because he was the swing vote on many critical issues like affirmative action, a woman right to choose and gay marriage just to name a few.   I didn't forget that he was a conservative appointed by Ronald Reagan, and in this 2017-18 SCOTUS term he swung far too often to the right for my tastes.

That news from the SCOTUS was being heralded with weeping and gnashing of white liberal progressive teeth, but was met with me and others in Black TBLGQ world with a collective shrug.

Bottom line is we, Hillary Clinton  (and especially this blogger) told y'all what would happen if y'all didn't get over your butthurt Bernie fee fees, look at the big political picture, realize the 2016 election was about the SCOTUS and federal judiciary and vote accordingly.

My humanity as an unapologetic Black trans person was on the ballot, so you damned skippy I was with her.

And many of you failed to do so in enough numbers, especially in several critical swing states for Trump to shockingly win.

So what do we do now?   Exhale, and prepare to fight tooth and nail to mitigate this disaster by firing everything with an 'R' behind their name on the ballot in November.

This is not a surprise to me because Kennedy is 81 years old.   As I have been pointing out since 2012 there were a potential four SCOTUS nominations that would potentially come open either in Barack Obama's second term of the term of the 45th president. 

So while some peeps are trying to rehash the 2016 election, the bottom line is that 2016 election ship has sailed.   As usual I and every Black person in America, despite us trying to warn you white liberal progressives of the danger of a Trump presidency, unfortunately still have to deal with the fallout from liberal progressive lack of political vision and massive failure to pay attention to the big political picture.

What's that big political picture?  Every election matters.  The federal judiciary matters, especially to marginalized and non white Americans.   Control of Congress and the White House matters.

Trust Black women 

Seeing the big political picture means that some of y'all on the left need to stop hating on the Democrats and realizing that they are the only political party big enough and in the position to stop the slide toward authoritarianism.

Translation:  That means your puny third parties aren't big enough or organized enough to take on the massive job of stopping this country's slide toward conservative authoritarianism.  It also means your azzes are going to have to do what George Will and others have asked you to do and vote for Democrats up and down the ballot this November.

I don't want to hear jack about the Democrats didn't do this or that, left wing ideological purity or 'I voted my conscience'.   The only people that have a credible claim toward voting their conscience are the 65, 843,063 Americans who voted for Hillary Clinton to become the 45th POTUS.   

Focus.  Everything and every policy we value as liberal progressive is in danger of political extinction.   It's past time you far left peeps fight the Republicans who are the major cause of the political drama you hate as hard as you do the Democrats.

Black and other POC Americans have been in fighting mode because we have to be.  Would be nice for the rest of y'all to get in formation and join us in firing the GOP this November at the ballot box and in every election cycle for the next 20 years.

Because your kids, grandkids, nieces and nephews are counting on you to do so.

   

50th Anniversary of Thurgood Marshall Becoming First Black SCOTUS Justice

With all the horrible news coming out of Las Vegas concerning our latest domestic terrorist attack,  almost slipped my mind that today was the 50th anniversary of Thurgood Marshall being sworn in as the nation's first African-American Supreme Court justice.

Marshall  had been nominated by President Lyndon Baines Johnson on June 13, 1967 following the retirement of Justice Tom C. Clark.   He bad already made history by becoming the first African American to be appointed as the United States Solicitor General in 1965,

Marshal was confirmed by a US Senate vote of 69-11 on August 30, 1967, and was the 96th person to become a US Supreme Court justice. 

He served from August 30, 1967 until he retired due to poor health on October 1, 1991

50th Anniversary of Loving v. Virginia SCOTUS Case

Today is the 50th anniversary of the US Supreme Court dropping the landmark Loving v Virginia case decision which killed the laws prohibiting interracial marriage in this county.

The case was brought by an interracial couple, Mildred and Richard Loving, who had gotten married in Washington DC in 1958 and returned to Virginia to live.   They were arrested, tried and convicted in the town of Bowling Green, VA for violating the white supremacist 1924 Racial Integrity Act.

They were sentenced to a year in jail, but the sentence was suspended under the condition that the Lovings leave Virginia and not return for 30 years not even to visit family.  

The Lovings moved to Washington DC, and Mildred Loving wrote a letter to then Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy appealing for help in their case.

That letter was forwarded to the ACLU,  whose lawyers subsequently filed the legal case that went to the Supreme Court.   On June 12, 1967 the SCOTUS unanimously ruled that Virginia's laws against interracial marriage violated the 14th Amendment and were unconstitutional.  

That ruling overturned similar laws still on the books in 16 states, and led to a surge of interracial marriages.  In addition, the precedent set in the Loving v Virginia case was cited in several cases holding that restrictions on same sex marriage in the United States was unconstitutional, including the 2015 Obergefell v Hodges SCOTUS decision.

In fact, Mildred Loving on the 40th anniversary of the case commented about the then same sex marriage battle that was raging and winding its way through the courts.

"I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people’s civil rights."

Richard Loving died in 1975 and Mildred Loving died in 2008, so they didn't get to see that legal precedent they set by standing up against injustice being used to strike down injustice against another group of marginalized Americans.

And in the United States today, one in every six married couples is an interracial one and I know more than a few of those couples in my own life.

So while this case wasn't exclusively about love conquering all as the movie Loving would have you believe, this case at its core was about striking down white supremacist oppression and an unjust law.

At the same time, to borrow a line from Battlestar Galactica, you cannot declare war on love.

Gavin Grimm Case Going To The SCOTUS

Looks like the G.G v Gloucester County Schools trans human rights case is about to become a landmark US human rights case

On Friday the US Supreme Court announced that they would hear the Gloucester County, VA school district's appeal to the 4th Circuit ruling that favored Grimm.   It also sets up a landmark case that could determine the course of transgender rights in the US for decades to come.

A group of 23 states led by my transphobic Texas attorney general Ken Paxton (R) is fighting the DOE/DOJ guidelines that were issued by the Obama administration on behalf of transgender students.

The ACLU filed the original lawsuit on behalf of Grimm in 2015 because the Gloucester County board adopted a policy in December 2014 requiring trans students to use only single stall restrooms after some transphobic parents complained to the board.

That was despite the fact that Grimm, who was a high school sophomore at the time the unjust policy was adopted, had been using the boys restrooms for two months without incident with the permission of the school's principal

The ACLU contends that this is a violation of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution and Title IX of the US Education Amendments of 1972, which is a federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in school.

Translation: The ACLU is arguing that 'sex' in that law covers transgender people.   Ken Paxton and the other right wing transphobes he's leading want to make discrimination against transgender people legal.

Grimm originally lost at the federal district court level, but won his appeal in front of a three judge panel at the 4th Circuit court of appeals level in April.  The 15 judges of the 4th Circuit declined to rehear the case in May, thus establishing a trans positive precedent in the 4th Circuit court states that include North Carolina.   The Gloucester County school board decided to appeal the case to the Supreme Court, which in August unfortunately put the appellate ruling on hold .

The justices have finally decided to get off the sidelines and settle this matter.   It is hoped that by the time they hear this case sometime in April, there will be nine justices to hear it.

We'll also be nervously anticipating in Trans World the Grimm case ruling when it is announced in June 2017.

Remembering The Harris County Impact Of The Obergefell SCOTUS Ruling

One year ago the landmark Obergefell v Hodges case ruling was issued by the Supreme Court that made marriage equality legal in all 50 states despite the best efforts of right wing haters to enact marriage bans in many state constitutions.

It was a amazing day last year watching that history unfold as Nikki Araguz Loyd, Will Loyd, Ashton Woods, Brandon Mack, Ray Hill, Alene Levy and I sat in the office of attorney John Nechman and Mitchell Katine munching on Shipley's donuts, kolaches and sipping orange juice while await the landmark ruling that was about to drop at 9 AM our time.

When it did, I remember John looking stunned for a moment, and a wide smile subsequently breaking over his face as he announced to us that the SCOTUS had sided with Obergefell.

Since the Araguz v Delgado trans marriage case was at the Texas Supreme Court level at the time, Nikki asked what that meant for her case, and was told that it meant that she was going to win it since the opposition had based their entire case on being a replay of Littleton v Prange.

That's when I realized that the Obergefell ruling was also going to positively affect the ability of trans people to get married.   I heard a few hours later about other cis-trans couples also getting married either on that day or getting their licenses so they could do so later.

After celebrating at Nechman's office, Nikki, Will and I decided to head over to the Harris County Courthouse to see if our Republican county clerk Stan Stanart was going to  let the marriages happen or would they would try some last ditch massive resistance to delay things.


Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) was already trying to lay the groundwork for him and other oppressive county clerks to do just that.  As we arrived at the Harris County Courthouse at 12:30 PM there were already six people in line waiting to get their marriage licenses and get married.

As Nikki and Will got in line to get their marriage license, I kicked into reporter mode and started tweeting and posting Facebook statuses on the drama that was beginning to unfold at the Harris County Courthouse as Stanart tried stalling tactic after stalling tactic designed to not issue marriage licenses to same gender couples.

The legal hammers started coming down around 1 PM from Harris County Attorney Vince Ryan (D) and one representing a couple who was at the head of the line waiting to get their license.

As we watched and waited for that legal drama to play out, Judge Kyle Carter (D) announced to the folks waiting in line that he would waive the usual 72 hour waiting period and marry coupes in his chambers.

At 2 PM Stanart capitulated and started issuing marriage licenses to the growing line of couples, and Nikki and Will got their license and renewed their vows in Judge Carter's chambers    I also got to witness a few friends in the community like Daniel Williams and his spouse Jason do the same thing before departing for home.

That June 26 day was not only one for the history books, it was one in which I found myself in the interesting position of being able to watch how it unfolded in Harris County.

Sen. Franken Calls Out GOP SCOTUS Obstruction

Antonin Scalia's body wasn't even cold before Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) announced that he and his GOP colleagues wouldn't even meet with much less confirm any appointee that President Obama anoints as his choice to replace (in) Justice Scalia.

Sen. Al Franken  (D-MN)  put him and the GOP on blast for failing to do their duty, and here's the video of that Senate floor speech.

Enjoy.

You Lost, Scalia's Gone, And President Obama Gets To Pick His Replacement

I am laughing my azz off at the ridiculous comments and excuses coming from the Republicans in the wake of the unexpected death last weekend of Supreme Court (In) Justice Antonin Scalia.

His death shifts the balance of Supreme Court power once President Obama makes his selection to the liberal-progressives on the court, which has sent the GOP and the conservative movement into a foaming at the mouth frenzy trying to come up with excuses to keep from doing their job and holding confirmation hearings to avoid filling that critical SCOTUS seat.  

One of the WTF suggestions from Conservaworld was that President Obama appoint a conservative justice in the Scalia mode. Naw conservaplayer, that ain't how this works, so let Moni break it down for you.

There was an election in 2012 that you conservafools lost when President Obama was reelected.  The POTUS, because there is a vacancy on the SCOTUS in the wake of Scalia's death and he has another 340 days left in his second term, under Article II, Section 2 of our Constitution has the right and the duty to select his successor.  

I recall when Thurgood Marshall retired from his Supreme Court seat in 1991 and died two years later he wasn't replaced with another liberal SCOTUS jurist by George HW Bush, he was replaced by Uncle Thomas.

That was the consequence of the Democrats losing the 1988 presidential election.

So what if this is an election year?   No excuses GOP.  Anthony Kennedy, who is now the longest serving jurist on the SCOTUS was appointed by Reagan in November 1987 and confirmed on February 3,1988.

I do seem to recall a presidential election was held a mere nine months later.

As y'all probably guessed, I am deliriously happy that the SCOTUS is on the verge of flipping to liberal-progressive control and that President Obama will deliciously replace that dearly departed judicial bigot Scalia.

More importantly, President Obama's SCOTUS justice pick will shift the balance of power on the Supreme Court back to decency. fair interpretations of our laws, justice and not the WTF conservafool partisan excesses we've seen under the Rehnquist and Roberts conservative leaning courts.

And not only is America watching, so is the world.

You lost, Scalia's gone, we need a SCOTUS justice to replace him, and President Obama is chilling in the Oval Office waiting to select the next one. 

(In)Justice Antonin Scalia Dies

Was shocked to hear while I was at the State of Black Lives  convening that 79 year old Supreme Court (In) Justice Antonio Scalia has died of natural causes while on a hunting trip at a luxury ranch in Marfa, TX.

I have been pointing out that one of the critical issues in play in this 2016 election cycle is the Supreme Court, and with Scalia's death this just got real .

While I feel for his family and the people who loved him tonight as his body is transported back to his McLean, VA home from my home state, as you long time readers of TransGriot know, he was not one of my favorite justices on the court because of his racist comments and problematic rulings.

And that's as nice as I'm going to be about the man appointed by President Reagan to the SCOTUS in 1986.  He has been on the wrong side of history and human rights as part of a conservative SCOTUS majority rolling back or in outright opposition to laws and policies I believe are essential to advancing human rights in America..

And Clarence Thomas is now going to have to think for himself instead of just voting the way Scalia does..  

While President Obama has promised to appoint his replacement in due time, the GOP controlled Senate is going to attempt to do everything possible to stall replacing Scalia until 2017 in the hope they can win the presidency this November. .

President Obama and the Senate Democrats are going to have just as much pressure on them to get the nomination done before he leaves in January 2017 by liberal progressive groups.

Well, as I have been saying for months, the composition of the Supreme Court would be a major issue in this 2016 election cycle with four justices in their mid to late 70's .   With Scalia's death, that just became a reality and something we have to consider when we choose our Democratic Party presidential nominee.

It's just I and a lot of people didn't expect that fight to begin now with the unexpected death of Antonin Scalia..

Here Comes The SCOTUS 2015-16 Session

It's the first Monday in October, and that means a new Supreme Court term is about to commence that will run until June.

We saw what happened at the end of the 2014-2015 term last June with the landmark Obergfell ruling that legalized same sex marriage across the nation and still has the wingers in a tizzy.  

What SCOTUS ruling will come out of this 2015-16 session and cases they have agreed to hear that will please some people and piss others off since we are still stuck with a 5-4 conservafool leaning majority?  

Will there be another landmark ruling in this 2015-16 session?.

This is also where I remind y'all that the upcoming 2016 presidential election is all about what shape the SCOTUS takes for the rest of your lives and much of your children's lives.

So here come the SCOTUS judges in a few hours.

Countdown To A SCOTUS Ruling

The clock is ticking toward the end of this latest 2014-2015 term of the Supreme Court session, with the country anxiously awaiting a ruling that could open the door to marriage equality becoming the law of the land.

If that ruling does come down eithe today, Friday or on Monday, looks like the GOP establishment in Texas is prepared to go the Massive Resistance 3,0 route that Alabama has tried to keep its LGBT citizens from exercising that right to marry,

Looks like the GOP county clerks in Texas are already prepping to not be ready to issue marraige licenses to the couples who wish to have them and that list includes Stan Stanart of Harris County.

Elections matter people, so take out your frustrations about Stanart and his partisan actions along with all the other GOP oppressors at the ballot box next year.

As for which way I think it will go, I believe in this hyperpartisan SCOTUS, it will probably be a 5-4 decision.

We will also be wondering in Trans World what effect this ruling will have on our ability to get married since it was negatively affected by the push that started in 2003 for same gender marriage.

But in the interim, all eyes in LGBT America will be turned toward Washington DC.. tuned to news stations and reading their fave blogs to find out what happens when that long awaited SCOTUS opinion is released.

The SCOTUS Starts Its 2014-15 Session Today

Hide the Constitution, because the SCOTUS is in session starting today through June 2015

And yeah, have no love for the four conservafool politicians in black robes and their kneegrow sycophant who is a disgrace to the memory and distinguished legal career of Thurgood Marshall

As to what cases they will accept  for argument, while they are ducking same sex marrige for now, they are taking on a potentially important race-discrimination case to its 2014-15 docket.

It's a case that could have major implications for would-be borrowers, banks, and businesses.

As of yet don't see any voting rights cases on the docket or any others that impact LGBT rights, but you know I'll be paying close attention and will post any news of what happens there if one pops up between now and June 2015.

Judge Posner, Too Bad You Didn't Recognize Voter ID=Voter Suppression In 2007

“Let’s not beat around the bush: The Indiana voter photo ID law is a not-too-thinly-veiled attempt to discourage election-day turnout by certain folks believed to skew Democratic.”
--Judge Terence T. Evans,  Dissenting opinion, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board case

The landmark Crawford v. Marion County Election Board case in 2007 that was subsequently upheld a year later by the SCOTUS unleashed a new way for the GOP to engage in their Southern Strategy tactics of suppressing the voting rights of non-white Americans.

As we in Texas started the first election cycle in which that Spawn of Conservasatan Voter Suppression law is impacting us no thanks to the SCOTUS frakking with Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, we have the bitter irony of the US Seventh Circuit court judge who wrote the opinion in favor of it, Judge Richard A Posner, now saying he was wrong in that case. 

Posner was appointed to the Seventh District Court of Appeals in 1981 by President Reagan and is a senior lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School.  In his 40th book, “Reflections on Judging,” Judge Posner said, “I plead guilty to having written the majority opinion” in the case. He noted that the Indiana law in the Crawford case is “a type of law now widely regarded as a means of voter suppression rather than of fraud prevention.” .

Gee, any person of color who is or isn't an attorney could have told you that. Judge Evans tried to tell you that in 2007.



Thanks Judge Posner for admitting you were wrong in that case, but it's too little and way too damned late.

Judge Evans (who passed away in 2011) isn't around to hear you say it, and your 'you were wrong' admission on video and in print is of little comfort to those of us living in GOP controlled areas of the country who have to deal with the repercussions of these Voter ID laws you and Judge Sykes' opinion in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board helped unleash on the rest of the nation.

        

Uh Oh-The SCOTUS Is In Session

When I last had a chance to vent about the US Supreme Court, I was highly pissed along with many other African-Americans about the 5-4 conservafool majority decision in the Shelby case that eviscerated Section 4 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

And what incensed me even further was that once again Uncle Thomas was eagerly living up to his 'honorary white man' status Pat Buchanan bestowed him with by voting in lockstep per usual with Antonin Scalia  

The conservafools in Texas and NC within hours of that unjust SCOTUS decision passed or implemented voter suppression laws that US Attorney General Eric Holder is now suing them over using Section 2 of the law.

Texas GOP AG Greg Abbott implementing the unjust Voter Suppression law that was blocked in court prior to the Shelby decision is a major reason I'm supporting Wendy Davis for governor.

It's the first Monday in October, and the Roberts Court is now back in session for another term that will last until June 2014.   What cases will the Court hear during this term so the conservative justices can roll back the human rights of African-Americans again?

We also come into this new 2013-14 term with three of the justices in their middle 70's and liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg turning 80 years old.  Conservative Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy are both 77 and liberal Justice Stephen Breyer is 75.  

So when is the next SCOTUS vacancy going to pop up that President Obama will have a chance to fill and who will he appoint to do so?   Will he appoint an African-American woman to fill it or will he go with someone from the Native American, Asian or Latino community if that happens?. 

It'll need to happen by 2015 because after that, there is no way a SCOTUS justice nominee, especially if its one of the conservative ones being replaced by a moderate to liberal nominee to FINALLY change the balance our way will get confirmed during a presidential election year and the last of President Obama's term as much as the GOP foaming at the mouth hates him.

But once again we'll have to keep an eye on developments from the Supreme Court building that have just as much if not more impact on our lives than any legislation coming from Capitol Hill or executive orders from the White House.

Congrats on DOMA and Prop 8 Being Overturned...But

I don't feel much like celebrating when my human rights went backwards yesterday no thanks to another narrow 5-4 Supreme Court decision. 

When the conservafool dominated SCOTUS fracked with the Voting Rights Act Section 4 yesterday, it was akin to a punch to the gut

It was even more infuriating because a Oreo cookie chomping knee-grow sellout cast the deciding vote to help disenfranchise his own people.

I know civil rights is not a zero sum game, but that's the way it looks to a lot of African-Americans today inside and outside the trans and SGL community. One group got their rights advanced while the centuries old historical pattern of crapping on the human rights of African-Americans made a comeback.
The bitter irony in all of this is the SCOTUS VRA ruling was aided and abetted by a self hating Oreo cookie chomping knee-grow sellout who isn't fit to shine the shoes of the great justice Thurgood Marshall, much less follow him onto the Supreme Court. 

An additional bitter irony to SGL and trans peeps is that the same Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is being loudly praised in non person of color GL circles today for his marriage equality rulings is the same one who sided with the majority to roll back our human rights. 

It also takes place in a Supreme Court in which the Chief Justice of it made his reputation and his fortune working to kill the Voting Rights Act. 

I believe the SCOTUS ruled the way they did on the VRA to throw the conservative movement a bone over DOMA and Prop 8 rulings they knew the conservative movement would excoriate them for.

And I'm not the only African-American member of the SGL and trans community who doesn't really feel like celebrating today.   Take it away Jasmyne Cannick:

The white gay community has been banging its head against the glass ceiling of a room called equality, believing that a breakthrough on marriage will bestow on them parity with heterosexuals--because in all other areas including employment, home-ownership, wealth, healthcare, education, etc. one could argue that they are already equal in terms of access. Well congratulations, on today's rulings, you are that much closer to being equal with your white counterparts.

And while Black same-gender loving couples may benefit from today's rulings, I would be remissed if I didn't say that the right to marry does nothing to address our access to employment, home-ownership, wealth, healthcare, education, etc. and so for many of us the fight continues because being able to get married is half the battle, the other half, is being able to have a home to live in, a job to provide for your family, access to affordable healthcare to share with your family, and access to the type of education to make all of the above happen.

Not to mention our voting rights are now exposed to once again being suppressed and rolled back by the neo-Confederate Republicans who are hellbent on taking our human rights back to 18th century levels.

And some of you GLB folks enable that oppression by voting for them as 'proud conservatives'.

I can't forget that and the four century tortured history as an African descended American as you GLB folks are giddily hailing a major civil rights win.

50 years of hard, painstaking human rights work that people fought, marched, shed blood and died for just went poof at the hands of four black robed white males and their honorary white man (as declared by Pat Buchanan) Uncle Ruckus Thomas

It's also a wakeup call for this generation of kids and their elders not paying attention to the news cycle.  We just got the reminder yesterday by the Supreme Court that for African-Americans, we never have the luxury of presuming that our human rights are secure because they are always under attack. 

And Republicans and the conservative movement are all too willing to engage in rolling them back.

So congratulations GLB community for your hard fought marriage win.  But I won't be at the party raising appletini toasts with you. 

Voting Rights Act Messed With By Roberts KKKourt

I'm still too pissed off about this to even write about what happened to the Voting Rights Act right now after a busy, roller coaster emotion filled news day yesterday and prepping for a road trip to Denver for a family reunion.

This cartoon pretty much expresses how I feel about the VRA and Uncle Ruckus, er Thomas making the unjust ruling happen.