Alito Blasts LGBTQ Rights In Federalist Society Speech

Alito Blasts LGBTQ Rights In Federalist Society Speech

Politico reports:

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito delivered an unusually inflammatory public speech Thursday night, starkly warning about the threats he contends religious believers face from advocates for gay and abortion rights, as well as public officials responding to the coronavirus pandemic.

Speaking to a virtual conference of conservative lawyers, the George W. Bush appointee made no direct comment on the recent election, the political crisis relating to President Donald Trump’s refusal to acknowledge his defeat or litigation on the issue pending at the Supreme Court.

However, Alito didn’t hold back on other controversial subjects, even suggesting that the pressure Christians face surrounding their religious beliefs is akin to the strictures the U.S. placed on Germany and Japan after World War II.

Slate reports:

Alito abandoned any pretense of impartiality in his speech, a grievance-laden tirade against Democrats, the progressive movement, and the United States’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Alito’s targets included COVID-related restrictions, same-sex marriage, abortion, Plan B, the contraceptive mandate, LGBTQ non-discrimination laws, and five sitting Democratic senators.

Ironically, Alito began his pre-recorded address by condemning an effort by the U.S. Judicial Conference to forbid federal judges from being members of the Federalist Society. He then praised, by name, the four judges who spearheaded a successful effort to defeat the ban—or, as Alito put it, who “stood up to an attempt to hobble the debate that the Federalist Society fosters.”

Alito is delivering the keynote speech at this year’s Federalist Society convention. He’s using the occasion to defend the group, claiming its members face “harassment and retaliation for saying anything that departs from the law school orthodoxy.”

Alito attacks the Judicial Conference for attempting to forbid federal judges from being members of the Federalist Society, and praises the conservative judges who successfully fought the ban.

UHHH, Alito seems to be criticizing governors for issuing “sweeping restrictions” in response to COVID-19. Also criticizes progressives and New Dealers for putting too much faith in scientists and experts.

Alito says this rule by executive fiat is “where the law has been going for some time—in the direction of government by executive officials who are thought to implement policies by scientific expertise.” Suggests this is a dangerous trend.

Whoa, Alito is VERY critical of COVID restrictions and “rule by experts.”

Then he says: “in certain corners, religious liberty is fast becoming a disfavored right.”

He condemns “the protracted campaign against the Little Sisters of the Poor.” Calls it an “unrelenting attack.”

Alito now condemns Washington State for requiring pharmacies to carry Plan B, “which destroys an embryo after fertilization.”

He also criticizes the Colorado civil rights commissioner in Masterpiece Cakeshop who said “freedom of religion” can be used for discrimination.

Alito criticizes Harvard Law Prof. Mark Tushnet for this notorious blog post, and quotes from it extensively. Says “it’s not dark yet but it’s getting there,” quoting Bob Dylan.

Now Alito is criticizing the Nevada governor for giving casinos a higher COVID attendance cap than churches.

He moves onto criticizing the federal judge who suspended the rule that required people to pick up abortion pills in person.

Yikes. Alito condemns Obergefell, the same-sex marriage decision, and says it has led to censorship of people who believe marriage is “a union of one man and one woman.” Says freedom of speech is “falling out of favor in some circles.”

Alito brings up a brief filed with the Supreme Court by five Democratic senators in a gun case warning that the court is becoming too political. He calls the brief “an affront to the Constitution and the rule of law.”

Without saying the words “court-packing,” Alito warns about Democratic efforts to “bully” the court with threats to “restructure” it. Tells a story about a foreign judge threatened with death if he didn’t rule for the government.

Alito is done.

That was easily the most political speech I’ve ever seen delivered by a Supreme Court justice. Wow. Same-sex marriage, guns, abortion, contraception, persecution of the Federalist Society … he really squeezed it all in there. Yikes.

Probably the strangest aspect of Alito’s speech, other than his attack on COVID restrictions, was his claim that people who oppose same-sex marriage get called “bigots” and this somehow threatens freedom of speech. But how?! Public criticism is not censorship! He knows this!

Here is Justice Alito complaining that the Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage decision has crushed the free speech of anti-LGBTQ advocates.

Here’s Justice Alito complaining about this amicus brief filed by @SenWhitehouse, @SenBlumenthal, @maziehirono, @SenatorDurbin, and @SenGillibrand, and warning of Democrats’ threats to “restructure” the Supreme Court.

And here is Justice Alito defending Masterpiece Cakeshop’s Jacks Phillips for refusing to bake a cake for a same-sex couple. Alito notes that the couple was offered a free cake elsewhere, then supported by “celebrity chefs.”

As @danepps pointed out, Alito inadvertently made a very strong argument for court reform this evening. @Slate

Originally tweeted by Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) on November 13, 2020.

6 thoughts on “Alito Blasts LGBTQ Rights In Federalist Society Speech

  • Am I too far out in left field when I question why a SUPREME COURT JUDGE — who is supposed to judge cases according to the Constitution — can make such public comments?

    Liked by 2 people

    • They all work with the principle that we are all subject to the laws of their making, or their gods making if you go that way. This is impeachable. Our laws are guided by the constitution, not a book of ancient mythological sources.

      “A democratically elected government in America is much more likely to favor democracy over a theocratic order. Everything that restores the power of people to govern ourselves undermines the pretensions of those who would dominate us in the name of God.”
      Stewart, Katherine. The Power Worshippers (pp. 276-277). Bloomsbury Publishing. Kindle Edition.

      Elimination of the constitution, democracy, and personal freedom is their goal.

      If anyone still had thoughts that the SCOTUS was intent on fair and equal application of the law should now understand our situation. We have a supreme court that is intent on giving the Christian church dominion over society. If we cannot win the two Senate seats from Georgia, our outlook is pretty dismal.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Hello Nan. We just had Barrett go through hearings where she refused to answer almost every question saying it might come up before the court or was a hypothetical. We went through that with the two SCOTUS justices before her. They all claim they can not offer an opinion as they must remain neutral. We now we see how neutral they really are. What hurts is that this justice demands that a choice of having a religion is far more important than a born trait such as same sex attraction. I can chose my religion, and change it, I can not do that for my sexual orientation or gender expression. No one is saying religious people can not practice their faith for themselves, we are saying they can not and shouldn’t be able to force us to practice it. The idea that religious freedom gives a person the right to discriminate hurts everyone in society. It use to be if your religion prevented you from doing something, you did not take the job doing it. Now the Kim Davis and other religious crusaders want the rights to take the job and have the government make special arrangements to satisfy the religious worker. They want the right to discriminate enshrined in law and the ultra religious justices want to give it to them. What a mistake. We should be expanding rights in a progressive society, not restricting them. Hugs

      Liked by 2 people

      • This note from my ACLU e-mail:

        If SCOTUS rules in favor of a Catholic organization in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, it would essentially give anyone who objects to LGBTQ people – and cites a religious basis for that objection – the right to opt out of all the protections that have achieved equal treatment for the LGBTQ community.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Hello Cagjr. Yes true, but it is even worse than just discrimination against LGBTQ+. If these religious freedom laws get approved by a highly religious court, then no non-discrimination laws can be enforced. You want to deny a Jewish person service, hey it is your religious right. You want to deny a black person service, it is your religious right. You don’t want to serve a multi-racial couple, it is your religious right. Justice Thomas should take note of that one.

          These groups think it will only stop at the gays and trans, but it wont. Once these haters get a toe in the door they will shove it as wide open to discriminate as possible. All for the pushing their god / religion on everyone else.

          They are not asking for the right to believe their own ideas, they are asking for the right to force those beliefs on to everyone else. Sadly I think the US is going to suffer a huge regression to denial of rights for people not in the accepted privileged group. Hugs


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.