You may have heard that the Supreme Court has ruled that “no discrimination based on sex” means “no discrimination based on sexual orientation, or whether you’re a man who thinks he’s a woman, or whether you’re a woman who thinks she’s a turnip.”
I think it’s a fair guess to say that conservatives will dislike this opinion and liberals will celebrate it.
So, how does it hurt Trump?
One of the big reasons conservatives come out to vote in presidential elections is that they want to see conservative Supreme Court nominees. And so far, Trump has done well with his court appointments.
But this decision will make people wonder if it’s worth it.
“What’s the point?” they might ask. “We spend all this effort to get conservatives on the court, and then once they get on the court, about half of them turn liberal anyway! We never see a liberal become a conservative, but we regularly see so-called conservatives become liberal. They get enamored of Washington society, and the praise of the local big shots, and they apostasize. Or maybe it’s just the swamp water. But one way or another, these so-called conservative judges don’t stay conservative.”
It’s not a major setback, but I think it is a setback.
Or maybe these so-called conservatives get overwhelmed by more powerful legal arguments than what Trump’s base could even begin to comprehend.
Does this almost touchingly cartoonish image of the powerful legal arguments overwhelming your ideological opponents who can only kneel, and whose dronelike compatriots can only look up in confusion as the deep wisdom defeats them from above, count as Phantasieinhalt or not?
Asking for a friend.
Hey, I was only asking. That is the standard line from Trump’s quarters nowadays.
I think it’s more major than that. On one hand, it’s just another few degrees for the ever-boiling frog, so what’s the difference? On the other, it’s almost enough to make you start thinking of going full Benedict Option as politics are obviously futile here in Wonderland. So I could imagine a substantial decrease in motivation.
On the other hand, and just in time for Trump, there’s violence, looting, rebellion, a defund the police movement (one supporter who helpfully explained in the NYT that ‘Yes, we mean literally abolish the police’), and many politicians who made it a little too obvious that some types of distance violation are worthier than others.
So who knows? I suspect that were I an American I’d crawl over broken glass to vote for Trump, and I don’t even care that much for him.. but I don’t know how representative conservative Canadians are of the Yankee everyman.
“it’s almost enough to make you start thinking of going full Benedict Option as politics are obviously futile here in Wonderland.” Exactly.
But I think the American conservative is still a little too optimistic for that. For a little while longer.
According to a Politico article, despite some conservative blow back, it seems Senate Republicans are supportive of the decision and Gorsuch. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/15/gorsuch-lgbt-republicans-321096
Although I don’t morally agree with the LGBTQIA+ community (aka the alphabet people), I don’t see the issue with them having protection under the law. For instance, it seems a little odd that an employer could fire or discriminate against someone merely because they are homosexual, especially if it has nothing to do with their job or performance. Maybe I’m missing something but as I’ve reviewed Gorsuch’s perspective it seems reasonable.
Frankly, I think the SCOTUS (and all courts) should judge based on what’s Constitutional and right. When we start expecting the court to make decisions with respect to partisan politics, it will likely lead to decisions that will be regretful.
Senate Republicans? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. That’s a good one.
Agreed. But this has to be weighed against the opposite factor: The SC ruling against gays would have energized the Democrat base and lead to alot more voters on that end as well.
The net impact? Not sure. I think legal protections under the law for employment would be super bipartisan at this time, thus ruling against it would have likely driven more anti-Trump fans than ruling in its favor pro-Trump voters. My guess though.
Check out the new ruling against Trump’s attempt to end DACA. This one strikes the heart of the beast more directly than protections of LGBTQ people against discrimination.