Mad About The Partisan SCOTX Ruling? Punish Them At The Polls!

I and other peeps in the Lone Star State are justifiably angry about the predictable ruling that came out of our all Republican Texas Supreme Court (SCOTX) on May 15.

Wouldn't be surprised if they were probably motivated by and 'scurred' of the fact that four of them are facing reelection this November and possibly may not be sitting in those cushy leather seats next year.

After taking L's at the state district court and 14th Court of Appeals level on the question of expanding mail in ballot access in the midst of COVID 19 fears, indicted Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) appealed to the Republican controlled Texas Supreme Court to halt progress on getting mail in ballot voting in place in time for the 2020 election this November.

There are fears that another nastier wave of COVID 19 will strike this fall.  We have already witnessed 70 people testing positive for the Trump Virus after another GOP controlled state Supreme Court in Wisconsin issued partisan rulings that forced people to vote in person during their primary back on April 7.

Wanting to avoid that disastrous scenario, Texas voting right advocates and the Texas Democratic Party have been pushing for expanded access to mail in ballots for this upcoming election.

But fears of another blue tsunami coming November 3 have skittish Republicans being hypocritically opposed to expanding mail in ballot access, a method they frequently use.

Paxton cited their usual 'voter fraud' talking points lie to weakly justify opposing it in a letter he sent to the SCOTX last Wednesday urging them to halt progress on expanded mail in ballots, 

"Among the State’s highest and most profound interests is protecting the integrity of its elections," Paxton wrote Wednesday. "To advance that interest, the Texas Legislature requires almost every voter to vote by personal appearance at a designated polling place, where trained poll workers confirm the voter’s identity before issuing him a ballot."

Yeah right, miss me with that BS, since you Republicans are committing much of the voter fraud you claim to be trying to prevent.  You're also cynically using COVID 19 as a new tool to try to suppress turnout.

The partisan SCOTX ruling means that while the merits of the case are being decided, nothing can happen until the appeal of the state district court case moves forward through the legal system.

And while we wait for Lord knows how long that to happen, that delays efforts for Lone State State election officials to get prepared to implement and administer an election that uses vote by mail ballots.

While Patton and Texas republicans by extension were pleased with Friday's ruling, Texas Dems and voting rights advocates justifiably put the partisan unjust ruling on blast.

''This is a dark day for our democracy.  The Republican Texas Supreme Court is voting to force the people of Texas to choose between their health and their right to vote.  They would have Texans die, just so they can hold on to power, "said Texas Democratic party chairman Gilberto Hinojosa. 

"Voters should have the ability to vote by mail during a pandemic if they feel their health is in danger. Every single justice who ruled today should be ashamed of themselves.  They are the new Republican death panel, Hinojosa added. .

Yeah Chairman Hinojosa, the Republicans in Texas and everywhere else in the US , including the White house, have made it clear they want the rest of us who aren't 1% cishetero conservative white males to die.

And while we wait for that to happen, that delays efforts for Lone State State election officials to get prepared to implement and administer an election that uses vote by mail ballots.

So yeah, be mad about this ruling.  But just being angry about this ruling doesn't do squat to change the fact that all nine seats on the Texas Supreme Court are still GOP controlled.

But punishing them at the polls will. 

As I like to say, the best way to get back at a politician who pissed you off is to make then an EX-politician.  Translation: I take my anger at the stuff Republican politicians do by heading to my fave early voting location and firing them.

Four members of the GOP SCOTX have terms expiring in 2020.  They are Jane Bland in Place 6, Jeffery Boyd in Place 7, J. Brett Busby in Place 8 and Chief Justice Nathan Hecht .

They are being opposed by Democrats Kathy Cheng, who is running for Place 6, Judge Staci Williams for Place 7, and Judge Gisela Triana in Place 8.  Judge Amy Clark Meachum is running for SCOTX Chief Justice.

Cheng is a Houston area attorney who previously ran for SCOTX Place 6 in the 2018 cycle, won in the primary, but unfortunately lost in the general election to then incumbent Justice Jeff Brown.  After winning that full four year term, he was subsequently appointed to a federal judicial bench by Trump. 

That has given Cheng another shot at the Place 6 seat, this time against Bland, who was appointed to the seat by Governor Abbott in September 2019.

Judge Staci Williams has served as the judge of the Dallas based 101st District court since 2014. 
She handily won reelection to her 101st District Court bench in 2018, and will be the Democratic candidate for SCOTX Place 7 taking on Justice Boyd..

Judge Gisela Triana has served since 2018 as a judge on the Texas 3rd Court of Appeals Place 6 seat, based in Austin.  She will be the Democratic nominees for the SCOTX Place 8 seat held by Justice Busby, who like Bland, was appointed to fill the seat by Governor Abbott in February 2019.

Judge Amy Clark Meachum, who currently serves on the 201st District Court, in Travis County (Austin for you non Texans) is running for Chef Justice.   She has served on the 201st bench since 2010, and was reelected in 2014 and 2018

Normally only two to three SCOTX judges are up for reelection in a cycle.  Because we had one move up to the federal bench after the 2018 election, we have a rare opportunity as liberal progressive Texans to potentially flip four seats and dramatically speed up the day the Texas Supreme Court flips to Democratic control

That tantalizing possibility of the SCOTX speedily flipping has Greg Abbott, Potty Dan Patrick and other Texas GOP politicians quaking in their cowboy boots.

So yes, I'm painfully aware that elections matter, and since we have for now partisan election of judges in the Lone Star State,  having Democratic judges matters

The late Nikki Araguz Loyd, if she were still with us, would tell you how much it matters. 
She lost the first round of her trans marriage case in state district court, but it was overturned at the Democratically controlled 10th Court of Appeals level. 

It was waiting for a hearing at the SCOTX level when the Obergefell SCOTUS marriage case dropped and made her and the Texas trans community a winner.

I'm still pissed off about the partisan July 2015 SCOTX ruling that forced the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance onto the 2015 ballot and its subsequent repeal that November.

It's past time to end Texas Republican control of the SCOTX, and we liberal progressive Texans need to seize the opportunity to do so now.   Will do us no good to flip the Texas House and start the process of flipping the Texas Senate if a conservative SCOTX remains to stymie any progressive legislative and legal progress Texas sorely with their partisan rulings. 

It's also past time that the SCOTX looked like and reflected the diversity and life experiences of all Texans, instead of being overwhelmingly comprised of conservative white males

By electing Judge Amy Clark Meachum, Judge Gisela Triana, Judge Staci Williams and Kathy Cheng this November, you will ensure that the SCOTX not only looks like the people of the state of Texas, you will ensure that the Texas Supreme Court finally has fairness and justice on it.

So let's get that party started, shall we?

Nikki Araguz Loyd Gets Another Legal Win At SCOTX!

It's another great day for Nikki Araguz Loyd in a Texas courtroom as the Texas Supreme Court in Austin ruled in her favor in her ongoing case to reinstate her marriage to her late husband Thomas Araguz III.

In the last update, she had a big win at the Texas 13th Appeal Court level in Corpus Christi that not only reversed Judge Randy Clapp's (R) unjust order that invalidated her marriage, but struck a what may be fatal blow to the Littleton v Prange case.

It also sent the case back to Judge Clapp's court where we hope the arc of the moral and legal universe will continue bending toward justice for her and the Texas trans community.

The case was appealed to the all GOP dominated Texas Supreme Court by the Delgado legal team, and in a ruling that came back today that was a wonderful surprise for her and the Texas trans community , the SCOTX without comment denied hearing their petition.

Translation, the ruling of the Texas 13th Court of Appeals stands.

Of course, when I talked to an obviously happy Nikki Araguz Loyd about her latest legal win, she said, "I'm elated that the Texas Supreme Court saw fit to do the right thing in my case.   It gets us past another major  hurdle and one step closer to the Lone Star State recognizing the transitioned gender identity of trans people."

I hope and pray that is the case as well.

Italy Becomes Sixth Nation To Allow Trans Self Identification Without Surgery

Thanks to a recent Italian Supreme Court ruling, Italy has now become the fifth nation to acknowledge that trans people have the right to self identify without requiring genital surgery or medical intervention.

Italy now joins Argentina, Denmark, Malta, Portugal and Ireland in doing so.

The landmark ruling overturned adverse lower level  court cases and makes it clear that the official gender record can be amended without surgery or sterilization.

The plaintiff in the case was a now 45 year old trans woman who in 1999 was granted permission to undergo genital surgery but decided over time that surgical intervention wasn't necessary.to get social recognition as a  woman.

Burt a tribunal in Piacenza and the Appeal court in Bologna both said no prior to her win at the Italian Supreme Court level.

The Court stated:   The desire to align body and spirit is, even in the absence of surgical intervention, the result of a very personal journey to gender identity, supported by a range of medical and psychological treatments that will vary according to individual personality and need.

‘The moment of truth is deeply influenced by individual characteristics.

‘Ultimately, it can only be the end result of a process of self-determination towards the goal of a change of sex.’

The Court also stated in their landmark ruling: ‘The complexity of the route, which encompasses a plurality of medical treatments (including hormonal and aesthetic) as well as psychological further illustrates how that right is central to the expression of individual and social personality and social, insofar as a proper balance is to be struck between the public interest… and the limits of our legal system.

The Italian Supreme Court ruling comes one week after Ireland passed legislation to allow trans people there to self identify without surgical intervention.   It is also increasing pressure on France and Great Britain to follow suit.

At any rate, it's a wonderful day for our Italian trans cousins.   As for when it will happen in the United States, I'm not holding my breath with science denying Republicans in control of Congress right now. 

TransGriot Note:  Initial photo is of Italian girl like us actress Vittoria Schisano.  She wasn't the plaintiff in this case, but is the most well known Italian trans woman right now.

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.

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.

Nerve Wracking SCOTUS Watch Week

Good thing I'm going to be hitting the road in the middle of the week for a long interstate highway journey to Denver.  It'll keep me from not being stressed out reading SCOTUSblog about the potential results in several cases of importance to me and the various communities I'm a part of.  

I'm keenly interested in the Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder case which takes aim at Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, the Fisher v UT Austin one and the ones the marriage equality peeps are sweating in Hollingsworth v Perry and United States v. Windsor.

Note to John Aravosis and the rest of you GL peeps pimping that tired Blacks are keeping us from getting gay marriage meme, let me drop another 50 megatons on knowledge on to you irradiate that lie. 

The NAACP Legal Defense Fund wrote friend of the court briefs in support of striking down DOMA and was part of the coalition of organizations filing in the Hollingsworth v perry care to take down Prop 8.

The LDF has been filing friend of the court briefs on behalf of the LGBT community since the 1996 Romer v Evans case. 

But back to the SCOTUS and these upcoming landmark cases.  The only thing we know about these cases is that there is no way of knowing which way they will go, and we can't even say for certain the vote will break down on 5-4 conservative-liberal lines as has been the pattern in the Roberts Court era.

For those of us who like to see human rights expand, all we can do is watch, hope and pray that justice prevails. 

These SCOTUS decisions will drop either sometime this week or next, and you will definitely know when it happens because the online chatter will be off the charts when it does.

The Supreme Court Taking Up Affirmative Action Again

The Supreme Court is hearing arguments today on the contentious subject of affirmative action once again in a case that has Texas roots.

The SCOTUS will hear an hour of arguments in the case of Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, which asks the court to rule on whether the university's consideration of race in admissions is constitutional.

Abigail Fisher, a 22 year old white woman who was rejected from UT Austin in 2008, has filed suit against the school, arguing its consideration of race doesn't meet standards previously set by the high court in the 2003 Grutter v Bollinger case.

The Supreme Court set a precedent in Grutter v. Bollinger  by rejecting the use of racial quotas but said that schools could consider race as part of a "holistic" review of a student's application.

In 2003, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was the swing vote in favor of the "holistic" approach and when this Fisher case is argued Anthony Kennedy may possibly be that swing vote.

The University of Texas and other state schools as a result of the Hopwood case automatically takes the top 10% of high school graduating seniors, but Fisher wants college admissions to be "completely race neutral and race blind."

It has drawn amicus briefs for and against it with the opponents being sellout Rep. Allen West (R-FL), former Reagan Attorney General Ed Meese and the libertarian leaning Cato Institute.  The supporters range from Democratic Senate leaders Harry Reid (D-NV) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Teach for America and the American Psychological Association. Dozens of organizations in favor of the University of Texas system plan on holding a rally outside of the Supreme Court today.  

If the court rules against the University of Texas, it could potentially change the way schools across the nation talk about race.

This 2012 Election Is STILL About The Supreme Court

As much as the pundits will try to make this election about the economy, I submit this election is about a far more important factor the media pundits aren't talking about in terms of the Supreme Court.

I bring this subject up because in a few hours another term of our nation's highest judiciary body starts and runs through June 2013.   Just as in the last term, there will be some contentious subjects such as Section V of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, same gender marriage, Prop 8 and affirmative action that come up to be argued in front of the 5-4 conservative leaning Roberts Court.

It hasn't escaped my attention that there are four justices who are over 70 years of age.  Clinton appointed Supreme Court Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg (77) and Stephen Breyer (71) are past that age on the liberal progressive side.

Reagan appointed Supreme Court Justices Anthony Kennedy (73) is a predominately right leaning swing vote, and reliably conservative Antonin Scalia is 74.    

The next president (and I pray it's a second term President Obama) could possibly get to appoint three and possibly four Supreme Court justices during his next term  and shape the direction and political orientation of it for the next thirty to 40 years.  

For you people who claim there's no difference between the two parties, nowhere does your rhetoric look more delusional and politically clueless than when it comes to what person is in the Oval Office picking Supreme Court justices and judges for the federal judiciary.

The last thing I want is a President Romney (yecch) advised by Robert Bork picking those justices.


I would rather have it continue in the liberal-progressive direction of being diversified as the trend has been under President Obama.  

We have already seen President Obama's first two picks be women in terms of Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. 

I'd also like to remind people there has never been an African-American woman, an Asian of any gender, a Latino male or a Native American jurist of any gender selected to serve on the SCOTUS.

As a matter of fact President Obama's judiciary picks have been leaning heavily towards women and persons of color.   He has had appointed and confirmed a record 72 women to the federal judiciary in his first term with 29 of those women being non-white ones.   31 of President Obama's judicial picks were African-American, three were openly gay and there is no reason to doubt that pattern won't continue in a second Obama term

With a gridlocked Congress, the federal judiciary will become more important to advancing our human rights agenda.  With 90 federal judicial vacancies and four potential ones at the Supreme Court level diversity in the federal judiciary not only improves the quality of the decisions rendered by federal courts, it's a trend I want to see continue.

It's not only about the economy stupid, it's about the federal judiciary. and especially the political orientation the Supreme Court will take for the people in my generation for the rest of our lives.

Ponder that point as you enter the voting booth on November 6 or whenever during this month you get to cast your early voting ballots.

Big Political Day Inside I-495

In a few minutes, the Supreme (Conservafool leaning) Court will let the nation know what they have kept a secret for three months- how they ruled on the Affordable Care Act..

May wish to check SCOTUSblog.com for the breakdown on what is sure to be another 5-4 ruling.

Meanwhile, across the street from the Supreme Court building there will be more drama at the Capitol building in the Republifool controlled US House as they move to vote around 3:30 EDT to cite Attorney General Eric Holder for contempt of Congress over the faux Fast and Furious 'scandal'..

A pissed off Congressional Black Caucus is threatening to walk out of the chamber to protest the partisan vote that is coming up and word is that the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the Congressional Asian Pacific Caucus, and The Congressional Progressive Caucus are also going to walk prior to the partisan travesty of a vote.

Will keep y'all posted about the developments inside Hollywood for Ugly People when they happen.

Bigot Harry Jackson Gets Pimp Slapped By Supreme Court

Instigator of Intolerance Bishop Harry Jackson was dealt a fatal blow to his efforts to force a repeal referendum on the question of same gender marriage in Washington DC today when the Supreme Court refused to hear his case.

The District of Columbia back on December 15, 2009 passed same gender marriage legislation on an 11-2 vote and it was signed into law by then DC mayor Adrian Fenty.

Bigot Harry Jackson and his right wing friends have been anxiously trying to kill it ever since, especially in light of the fact the state of Maryland is prepared to take up the issue in this year's legislative session in Annapolis. 

Jackson filed a lawsuit against the District's Board of Elections and Ethics after it refused to put an initiative on the ballot that would repeal the DC marriage law.   The board cited the 1977 DC Human Rights Law in ruling that the ballot question would in effect authorize discrimination.

The D.C. Appeals Court, the federal court that rules on District of Columbia matters, issued a 5-4 decision in July allowing the board of elections' action to stand.  But the Supreme Court, without comment, declined to take up the Jackson v. D.C. Board of Elections case.

It requires four justices to agree to hear a case before it is placed on the docket.

Now that the Supreme Court has legally pimp slapped him again, he can scurry back to his Lanham, MD megachurch and prepare to put more miles on his car running back and forth to Annapolis trying to fulfill his role as a drum major for injustice.

Christopimpin' ain't easy is it Harry?

Break Out The Constitution-New Supreme Court Term Starts Today

It's the first Monday in October, and that means another historic Supreme Court term started today with Justice Elena Kagan joining the court.

It's the first time in American history that three women have sat on the Supreme Court and hopefully an African American woman will join them one day to counteract Clarence Thomas acting as Antonin Scalia's ventriloquist dummy.

Since Kagan was Solicitor General, any cases that show up on the Supremes docket this year she'll have to recuse herself from, which lends itself to possible 4-4 deadlocks on some issues until the cases she litigated finish percolating through the federal court system.