Why Trump appointee Neil Gorsuch protected LGBTQ rights

[@killero00]

Why is there even a debate regarding whether or not its legal, let alone moral, to discriminate against people. What happened to "one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all?" Country is filled with a bunch of hypocrites

[@dalenedaylean3555]

You forgot the "under god" part and therein lies the problem for equality

[@luisgutierrez8047]

Cuz freedom goes both ways. Sometimes the court has to decide who's takes precedent

[@Swa1nTrain]

@UC63KUuo9RGMkuPz4-iUHApA it didn't work for Rkelly

[@AB-xe6ci]

Dalene Gragg under god was added to the pledge in 1954 during the Cold War to distinguish our selves against the communist who didn’t believe in any gods

[@noaheinstein2369]

Chris Yeh, exactly. E Pluribus Unum.

[@platypus8697]

It’s pretty disturbing that In 2020 people are still fighting for the right to be themselves

[@cornishmaid5073]

And the right to love who they want, too. 🌈🥰🌈

[@victoriagodley5277]

Platypus Exactly. America seems to be a backward country which is depressing. The corruption is astonishing and dangerous. Trump has polluted the country and I hope decent Americans will survive and move forward towards true democracy for all

[@StarFinderWebb]

They said the in 1500 I bet and 1800 ...2000

[@jorgepeterbarton]

The USA has always been about "freedom to take another's freedom" and that's always been the loudest interpretation.

[@andrewhunsaker4831]

@Galva Tron What? Sounds like you need a bit of self-reflection. Who are YOU exactly to tell who someone is or isn't?

[@ra001g]

If someone can do the job they should be able to stay in it.

[@nativesunnation8323]

I agree. However, all must ensure that they fit in with that company's culture so as to not negatively affect that company's business. If it is a muslim bakery and you are gay and hired to make the sandwiches...don't show up as a man in a dress with pork skin shoes on; otherwise, you should be fired. It's real simple. Other than that, what a person does in their own bedroom is their personal decision and between them and their God.

[@jacquelineperry2168]

Some places will take your job or want hire you if you don’t look a certain way.

[@totalcontrol4205]

@@nativesunnation8323 why would a gay man come dressed as a transperson and why would that make any difference? Does the flavour of baked goods change?

[@spocksvulcanbrain]

For gods sake. I live in the SF Bay area and you can't go to almost any business without encountering gays, lesbians, trans, punks, goths, etc. All the food is the same, service isn't affected and it's just plain illogical to think a person's presentation of themselves matters. The real reason this is an issue is that right wing bigots find it "icky." That's the real reason they want to be able to fire people.

[@craigbrinsden6195]

And likewise if they are not capable of performing the role the employer should have the right to dismiss without being labelled a hater. Unfortunately in today’s society this is not the case.

[@raj-hg7yd]

This is still a discussion? In 2020? In America??? This scares me more than anything else!

[@lpi6608]

still in the 1800 Rai

[@petermajewski8960]

What scares me more than anything else is that supposedly intelligent people could come up with such a decision! May God save America!

[@chefj4042]

@@petermajewski8960 Are you saying that this is a bad decision?

[@rodfranc1]

2020's America is goir back to 1950's America, Sadly reactionary conservatives and the religious right have taken over the government

[@jockyoung4491]

@@petermajewski8960 Intelligent people can disagree with you. Deal with it.

[@JoaquinLomeliJr]

*THIS SHOULDN'T BE HISTORIC* these are human rights, this shouldn't be news that you're now not allowed to discriminate on people for who they are. We are all human, this law should have been obvious on what you shouldn't be doing anyways.

[@jockyoung4491]

should have been but wasn't. Therefore historic

[@JoaquinLomeliJr]

@medschool2626 read my entire comment

[@JoaquinLomeliJr]

@@jockyoung4491 read my entire comment to make sense of it

[@petermajewski8960]

Is there a difference between a human, and a perverted human?

[@akiokoh7481]

its a small start towards a better change.. small... but a start..

[@brigittescott7826]

Mike And Karen Pence must be clutching their pearls.

[@terminator23destroyer15]

You are so fucking right

[@chrisparker3331]

I heard Mike gave Karen a pearl necklace.

[@hermanklump8983]

Brigitte Scott Mother works at a school that discriminates against gays.

[@tim3172]

@@StephenKershaw1 Citation heavily required... this ruling has no impact on schooling or any form of non-employment discrimination. It might LEAD to that and make it easier to pass laws but there is still a long way to go.

[@alexwarner6111]

Chris Parker surely I’m not the only one here who gets that?

[@cjp1599]

Shocking that in this day people-judges no less-think its OK to discriminate against anyone? Aren't judges supposed to be smart???

[@houstonrebel4449]

Well they are but they're not smart on your level.

[@victorjcano]

Brett Kavanaugh,Clarence Thomas , ? Justices Kavanaugh and Thomas were BOTH accused of sexual assault BEFORE they were appointed.. this should have absolutely been a unanimous decision

[@kbanghart]

@Liberal Is a Disease haha us Democrats trigger you

[@batboy3746]

This decision is a NO BRAINER, common sense ruling. I'm surprised it had to go to the Supreme Court. My company is VERY pro-LGBTQ for at least, more than a decade now. They are always telling us they support the rights of the workers, INCLUDING these folks. So...even mega-corporations are on board. Anyway...Guess who should be voted out in Nov? SUSAN COLLINS for her yes vote on Brett Kavanaugh (one of the NO votes on this case).

[@AdamBladeTaylor]

No, judges are hired to vote in favour of whoever's putting them in the seat. A huge corporation pays for a senator to be in office, then that senator pushes for a judge to be put into their seat so that that judge will vote in their favour.

[@im6gesim6ges]

The fact of the matter is, that Discrimination against sexual orientation has always been objectively wrong. And that more and more people are now seeing that it's wrong in 2020, Rather than more people believing it was okay 20 years ago

[@mechmat12345]

Not disagreeing with your opinion, but right and wrong and necessarily subjective.

[@rorycannon7295]

@DannyDaDuffyDucking Daffer uh no it is objectively wrong. u can make ethical axioms and build a set of ethics.

[@EricK-tb2dn]

@DannyDaDuffyDucking Daffer Discrimination based on sexual orientation similar to racism they're both objectively wrong.

[@EricK-tb2dn]

@DannyDaDuffyDucking Daffer and yes I am God. Praise me!

[@OMGitsTerasu]

@DannyDaDuffyDucking Daffer no thats an objective wrong. Just like murder. Objective/absolute wrongs/rights do exist.

[@laurentdrozin812]

I must confess that, viewed from western Europe, this discussion is bizarre. How is that still a thing?

[@napoleon9970]

Laurent Drozin its not.

[@WillToNihilsm]

@Ricki B. Thats fucking stupid. This cases has been in the courts for years, how could they have known it would end up in these George Floyd riots?

[@lumberjaxe8910]

Yeh POOOOOO it stinks!

[@suzyqualcast6269]

I thought your magasty had already ordered gays and trans out the Forces...

[@MTKwebsurfer]

Isn’t same-sex marriage still illegal in Italy and Switzerland?

[@unpaidtroll8475]

why do we have democrat judges and republican judges? shouldn't they be just judges? hard to get a fair shake if you toe the wrong line

[@jresdf3531]

Technically they are all just judges, they are just referred to party based on who appointed them

[@RaymondHng]

Judges have a ruling record. How they rule in past cases determines if they're liberal or conservative.

[@glenf6639]

@unpaid troll exactly! Because we have given the Supreme Court too much power by asking them to legislate. We can’t vote them out and we shouldn’t be asking them to make new laws. This should have been handled loooong ago by congress as most issues should be handled. When people get a verdict they like they are happy (and I’m sure most people are happy about this outcome) I’m happy about the outcome but angry about how it came about. We have to worry when we leave these things up to SC because there will be many other things we are not so happy about.

[@tomato-v8x]

@@RaymondHng More accurately, their judicial philosophy.

[@SalsaCharms]

I can’t believe I have to feel relieved for them actually doing the right thing😑

[@sharonsmelser2491]

It's a sad state of affairs we live in in US 2020. This kind of stuff should have already been solid back in the sixties w the hippies. Our Gov is like a slow moving freight train that keeps getting knocked off rails. Significant movement forward has to pushed by modern day thinkers.

[@TheNefastor]

Don't. It's just a blip upwards in a decades-long spiral downwards. The US is bound to become a failed state except now it'll also have gay rights. "Awesome".

[@fairwarning4267]

You people need to look at really happened here. The supreme court just defined a 3rd gender class and blurred the lines on Male and Female. Me a Man, I can teach your kids in school and say today I am a women and than go in an watch all your little girls change in the dressing room for gym class. At work I can go walk in to the girls bathroom and watch half naked girls and walk in to their stalls and they can't stop me or fire me because today I am Sara.

[@tim3172]

@@fairwarning4267 How much crack did you smoke before coming to the determination you're allowed to enter locked stalls without repercussions.

[@odysseus9176]

American Patriot That’s not at all what that is

[@prestontucker1687]

Because it's human rights 1st. Not tRump America 1st.

[@maryrochefortt505]

He's well aware..President Trump to you

[@Eyesthatray]

Mary Rochefortt oh I’m sorry do you speak for Trump? It’s my right as a US citizen to criticize any politician and that includes bone spurs 😂

[@claymore4496]

Mary Rochefortt lets be clear here. It’s the impeached president who was never really elected by the people and has been and always will be an illegitimate president. He will go down in history as the most fraudulent, corrupt person to ever occupy the Whitehouse.

[@petermajewski8960]

Sure as hell is, every human has the right to hire who he wants, and no court is going to tell me otherwise.

[@cagedtigersteve]

Remember when the White House was lit up as a rainbow....Let's watch that again.

[@mj3332]

You do not celebrate fairness it is something that should be as common as blinking your eyes.

[@Prins.F]

William H Music 2020 Tired of winning yet?

[@tabbyreed8925]

@@mj3332 Under normal circumstances, yes, but under this administration this was a miracle. So, I say celebrate.

[@nodata2032]

@@WilliamHMusic-oldschool hey this is a big win for you! You can come out now. You can't be fired.

[@jockyoung4491]

@@WilliamHMusic-oldschool Why? It means you can't be fired now,.

[@brookecambra1694]

It’s so weird to see the word “justice” in front of Kavanaugh’s name. I think they misspelled “criminal”

[@matthewcandela9448]

Brooke Cambra Because I don’t want to believe your a moron, I’m just gonna remind you that he was proven innocent. Guess it just slipped your mind right?

[@robyoung-pl1gq]

A rare bright spot in the reign of Dictator Donnie.

[@heyho4488]

You know, the Donald loves bright spots. Loves 'em. Always has. And his bright spots? The best. Unbeatable. You can't find any better ones. Other bright spots? Not good. Look at Sleepy Joe's bright spots. Full of lies. No meat. Can't trust them. SAD!

[@Plainsimple67]

STEREOTYPE IS THE WORST ENEMY OF THE LEFT, DONALD TRUMP WAS NEVER THE ENEMY OF THE LGBTQ OR THE BLACK AND ANY MINORITY GROUPS. THE LEFTIST MEDIA SET THAT CONDITION IN THEIR BRAINS TO BELIEVE THAT, HIS ANTI-ILLEGAL ENTRY INTO THE COUNTRY IS ABSOLUTELY WITHIN ALL CONCERNS EVERY LEADER OF ALL NATIONS!!

[@tetoalmonzeto2579]

@rob young easy soyboy Trump approved this decision moron

[@neb3757]

Wasn't it candidate Trump who offered Caitlyn Jenner to use any facilities she wanted in his business, the choice was hers. So why is this this news to some people? Why are some news organizations making it seem like this is something odd in the "people's president" presidency???? Go figure.

[@ryderoreilly9807]

@@Plainsimple67 by "leftist media" do you mean every media organisation that isn't Fox news?

[@sirdavidoftor3413]

While a happy time, sadly the person who started this case has passed away. This will be her legacy!!! Thank you for your perseverance and dedication to see this case through!! Stay safe, stay sane, be well

[@darkstorminc]

Which one? This case covered 3 different people iirc.

[@RaymondHng]

@@darkstorminc Two of the three litigants are deceased: Stephens and Zarda.

[@jazzym999]

Just remember , no matter who you are or what your sexuality is : 🌈 💕 you are all valid 💕 🌈

[@iJonel]

Amen!

[@flz9231]

What if i am against black lives matter ? Am I valid ?

[@captureitlive]

@@flz9231 youre valid... haha. I hate black lives matter too. Another facist group led around by a white liberal female.

[@Shelleybean3315]

Word.

[@jimmathers7924]

@@flz9231 The original comment was about sexual preferences being valid. "Valid" was used colloquially because by definition people can't be valid. opinions and thoughts being valid are determined by how reasonable and logically consistent they are. Now tell me, did you bring up your disagreement towards BLM just to get a reaction? As a "gotcha"? To "own the libs"? I honestly feel bad that you'd waste your time like that.

[@jrosner6123]

It was an unbiased decision. It doesn't have to be about gay or straight. It's about human and civil rights as seen under the law.

[@daedalron]

It's actually pretty obvious that's what the 64' law already did, and appaling that 3 supreme court judges think it is not... I mean, if you're fired because you're a man and homosexual, this means that if you were the exact same person, liking the same person, but being a woman instead, you wouldn't be fired. Therefore, you're fired because of your sex, which is illegal.

[@robbiejohnston9409]

Define human rights

[@onilovni1234]

Congratulations USA for being only 40 years late on this matter.

[@petermajewski8960]

Shame on Sodom Gomorrah and America!

[@Svengali764]

@@petermajewski8960 funny you seem to believe in Bible and forget the rest about kindness and compassion.

[@DA-eo7og]

@@petermajewski8960 You have a problem when someone puts on what they want and looks like they want, but you have no problem worshiping and praying the person who killed the firstborn children, Chances are that you are a Christian or a member of another Abrahamic faith

[@pageturner1401]

@@petermajewski8960Sodom and Gomorrah would be pleased of the decision.

[@blairbrown4812]

Better late than never,especially under these circumstances.

[@bolin38jg]

Bad day for Trump, first the Lincoln project ad with Lindsey Graham and know this, he doesn't know who is going to be the first of his tweeter rants. 🤣😂😁

[@tetoalmonzeto2579]

See it you people weren't so full of hatred. And you people are. That's why Trump will win again. He gave his approval for this decision today

[@Noreb]

@Teto he also ordered trans soldiers out of the military against the advise of army leadership and lied about why he did it.

[@mastertemple8369]

And the woeful Left can't beat him....ha ha ha the stable genius beat the loonie left and all you got is Burisma Biden...Alzheimers Joe as he's called now...

[@MrLarrySunshine]

@@tetoalmonzeto2579 aw! You even edited this drivel?! Check again maybe? Genius.

[@itsikabitch9005]

@Justin Grier Trump cared so much that he just recently tried to permit HHS to discriminate against transgender patients. He's routinely tried to deny transgender people the right to just about anything they had, apparently now including healthcare.

[@terrellrobinson3286]

Kudos on voting to treat people like people. A great man, indeed.

[@haicoai6269]

F ohkzbin.info/www/bejne/pYWZkn94d7ebfaN-

[@johnosuna1455]

@@haicoai6269 scary

[@terryvarta9306]

is it wat it has come to for a man treat another with dignity and earn greatness

[@Alusnovalotus]

Not great. He just saw the writing on the wall and he wants to keep his seat and not be vilified by history.

[@terrellrobinson3286]

@@terryvarta9306 The comment was made in gest.

[@debrajenkins1622]

It is way past the time they leave Consenting adults alone and go after child abusers.

[@winnifredsmith2830]

Debra Exactly! I have been saying this for yrs. Its just disgraceful that children are frequents targets of abuse and everyone focusing on.consenting adults. I just dont get it!!!

[@haicoai6269]

B ohkzbin.info/www/bejne/pYWZkn94d7ebfaN-

[@samadrid6321]

Just as long as transgenders can participate in the sport of their chosen gender.

[@purple6188]

@@samadrid6321 IF SOMEONE TRANSITIONS, THEY CONTACT THE COURT WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION, THEN ONCE THE INK IS DRY, YOU'RE NOW A MAN OR WOMAN IN THE EYES OF THE LAW! SEE, THAT WAS EASY! YEAH! :D

[@AdamBladeTaylor]

You have to be aware that while this make it illegal to FIRE someone for being LGBTQ+, it doesn't mean you can't stick them on the shifts nobody wants, give them crap duties or even flat out not hire them to begin with even if they would be the most qualified for a position. It's a tiny win overall. There is still a massive amount of change than needs to be made.

[@VillageFoodFactoryAsia]

hello my dear how are you today

[@bettym.3996]

Yes, but that is where we all are as humans who have to work. It's not like they come out and TELL you: you're not hired because... you're old or gay or not white or ugly or fat or in a wheel chair. The burden is still on the person mistreated to prove the allegation. So the law is in place for when employers are so consumed with their biased preferences that they DO mess up and say it or blatantly discriminate.

[@monkeythief5]

There’s actually laws against that kind of thing in some states I think. It falls under as forced firing or something.

[@monkeythief5]

Mike Carter What are you talking about?

[@edwardkantowicz4707]

@ Mike Carter You're an idiot if you believe such rubbish. It's un-American to deny anyone the right to earn a living. Your mafia is anti-capitalism, and at odds with the US Constitution. Time to grow up, and stop bashing the minorities you bigot.

[@acemacgruber6593]

It should be a 9-0 decision.

[@jesse_cole]

Alito: "Scalia would have excoriated this ruling." Sounds like it was a good decision.

[@camelsheit_on_the_walls446]

Thank you, Gorsuch. But really, this is something that shouldn't even need to be up for debate. This is about equality, it is about fairness, it is pure common sense. Shame on humankind to still be debating it, to not have reached a higher maturity.

[@miss.bitchswerve6329]

exactly

[@mj3332]

It's not a big deal it is a matter of common sense! Know one should be fired based on there sexual orientation!

[@jmc5910]

no one does, this ruling was for trans people , it wil allow them to be in any space they want

[@jimmathers7924]

@Adam Efimoff no one english.stackexchange.com/questions/8741/noone-no-one-or-no-one

[@ginakay354]

The Trump troll administration is common sense negative.

[@anonymoustopsecret5995]

No one*

[@anonymoustopsecret5995]

@Niya B. Sad truth.

[@BETTERWORLDSGT]

Good! Someones orientation has nothing to do with their Job. It's a personal thing.All that matters is Job.Performance.

[@demeta3201]

@HalF huh? Shoved down on you that they are gay ?

[@phalphalak]

It's not only orientation.

[@maybethisismarq]

HalF what?? How does someone not getting fired for being gay or transgender shoving it down on you??

[@miam1074]

Kavanaugh, of course voted for discrimination. How predictable

[@jaxs7267]

One small step for man.... Now we need to get this administration out of office!

[@bobbybecker6435]

YES, from your mouth to God's ear.

[@elizabethkovacs6528]

not you losser

[@northerniltree]

Kavanaugh likes beer. REALLY likes beer. Equality? Not so much.

Lol .. Betcha the DIVIDER-IN-CHIEF wishes he could fire gorsuch

[@MatrixUniverse1]

lol only a CNN viewer would say something as ludicrous.

[@EW-rx5gi]

@Chris Johnson Furst, imagine using the word "libtard" unironically. Second, remember just the other day when fox used *digitally altered photos* to report on chaz?

[@edwardkantowicz4707]

@ Chris Johnson, supporting legislation to bar any American the right to support himself is fundamentally divisive. YOU are antithetical to Liberty, and others' pursuit of happiness. Whatever do you propose to do with those who are discriminated against? A true conservative wouldn't want them all to resort to public aid.... You undermine the nation when you support things such as this. You're un-American, and have no business labelling others as "tards". Your language is quite telling of your limited education, and poor upbringing.

[@RaymondHng]

The president cannot impeach a federal judge. Only Congress can do that.

[@itwasagoodideaatthetime7980]

ROTFLMAO! 🤣 & The Trumpertantrum starts in 3... 2.. 1.

[@hewitc]

Trump will announce that he intends to appeal the decision to...........uh....Ivanka??

[@PhiloSurfer]

You are fired.........

[@jacksbaldhead8326]

trumpertantrum - LMFAOOOO!!! I DIE!!!

[@rorycannon7295]

@R.C.B. oh look, one statement exonerates an entire anti-lgbtq+ rhetoric? wow, i didnt know logic worked like that.

[@jockyoung4491]

@R.C.B. The problem is that what Trump says one day, he could say just the opposite the next day, and never admit it. What comes out of his mouth means nothing.

[@teddmented]

It just makes sense

[@chibuzonwachuku5624]

No it doesn't.

[@LuckiER89]

~. The world is waking up and are tired of being oppressed by these coward “elites”.

[@petermajewski8960]

The world happens to be 95% heterosexual. Why do just 9 judges get to decide for 95% of the population? Just plain wrong!

[@jockyoung4491]

@@petermajewski8960 It's called a Constitution. Deal with it.

[@sharonsmelser2491]

@@petermajewski8960 Heterosexual orientation is not an indicator of peoples view on the matter thou, so your stat is irrelevant. Come back when you have stats on support for those 9 judges decisions. I'll bet it's statistically significant.🤔

[@silveraxe301]

@@sharonsmelser2491 Ekzbin.info/www/bejne/qZXSZqNpg8eJkK8

[@purple6188]

YEP, IT'S GOOD! SEE, THAT WAS EASY! YEAH! :D

[@MrDavidBFoster]

OOOOOOOOH, I BET TRUMPY'S EARS ARE JUST-A-SMOKIN'!!!!!!!

[@Plainsimple67]

WHY, HE APPROVED IT AND TRUMP HAS NEVER DONE ANYTHING AGAINST THE LGBTQ, STOP BELIEVING EVERYTHING YOU ARE BEING FED BY THE LEFTIST MEDIA!!

[@jeckjeck3119]

@@Plainsimple67 Tell that to his Miller boy toy.

[@rollcaskett1812]

@@Plainsimple67 You mean the same man who banned transgender peoples from serving in the military in 2019? The Supreme Court didn't need Trump's "approval", it was happening either way, and your ignorance over what Trump has done while spouting "Trump has never done anything against the LGBTQ" is just proof of how blind Trump supporters are. Use Google for a change, it's there for a reason. i.imgur.com/BNWDdPb.png I even made it easy for you. Does Trump's own Twitter feed count as leftist media?

[@Plainsimple67]

@@rollcaskett1812 AREN'T THE GAYS AND LESBIANS SERVING IN THE MILITARY??!! THE TRANSGENDER IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT ISSUE MAYBE??!!! BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO CLUE WHERE THEY STAND ABOUT THEIR SEXUAL IDENTITY!!!! YOU ARE EITHER GAY OR LESBIAN, WHICH ONE ARE THE TRANSGENDERS, OT SEEMS LIKE UP IN THE AIR AND HAVE NO CLUE WHAT THE HELL IS IT THAT THEY WANT. AT LEAST GAYS AND LESBIANS KNOW WHAT'S THEIR SEXUAL PREFERENCE!!!

[@itsikabitch9005]

@@Plainsimple67 Were the transgender military ban and healthcare discrimination proposals completely made up by the media? Does that make Trump's own tweets "liberal media?" And also, no, Trump had no say in this decision. He can say whatever he wants, but at the end of the day, 6 justices approved it.

[@musicmadness1214]

2020 America and I’m just now able to feel comfortable that I can’t be fired for being gay.

[@maryc8552]

This is good. You should be comfortable with that.

[@fredm2903]

2020 and two people just got Lynched & your congress lost the debate on LYNCHING!

[@maryc8552]

@@fredm2903 oh pulease! Rayshard Brooks is no George Floyd! That was no lynchinching! That was a career criminal that didn't wanna go back to jail. Quit polishing this fool's halo. Convicted of Charges of felony Cruelty To Children, Battery On Family Member, False Imprisonment. Receiving stolen property, credit card fraud. Obstructing an officer, possessing weapons during a crime, interfering with custody, snatching his children without permission from their mother and battery.

[@Ecripter1]

@@maryc8552 Your side will lose, like they did when they fought as a confederacy.

[@maryc8552]

@@Ecripter1 my side? The confederacy? I am black you fool! This ain't about sides, this boy was a thug, been a thug a long time. He ain't no George Floyd that got choked to death! If we as black folks don't start being honest about when our people are wrong in these situations, we are going to lose the support for change. Now shut up telling me what side I am on!

[@CerciRodriguez]

Because it was the right thing to do. I'm still stun that we need laws to protect people from who they are.

[@jockyoung4491]

People aren't understanding that the Justices were not voting on whether gay rights SHOULD be protected. it was about whether they are ALREADY protected by existing law.

[@intercat4907]

"People" get it just fine. And isn't it nice.

[@MrFrankydave]

How was this not unanimous

[@wayneriley7367]

So the real question to cover is why the other 3 voted AGAINST this understood right of individuality!

[@nativesunnation8323]

Idk but I suppose it might have something to do with the fact that discrimination is already illegal so 'federal protected class' for this group was not necessary for their stated claims. All due respect, now, protected class for American Blacks, THAT's what the Supreme ct should have ruled into law. SEE: GEORGE FLOYD and all those like him that the laws still on our books since post slavery made the killing of Blacks lawful!....But, I digress. Let's focus on unnecessary protected class for a group that is already covered in anit-discrimination laws to ensure they can get jobs...while Blacks are literally being genocided in the streets withOUT protected class.

[@RaymondHng]

@@nativesunnation8323 Justice Samuel Alito wrote a dissent, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, asserting that the law, as written in 1964, did not consider aspects of sexual orientation or gender identity and thus rejected the majority stance. Justice Brett Kavanaugh also wrote a dissent in which he believed that due to the separation of powers it was up to Congress to amend the Civil Rights Act to include these classes but believed they should do so

[@nativesunnation8323]

@@RaymondHng Respectfully, I understand what you are stating. My premise is that this should not have taken precedence over anti-Black racism that is only increasing in this country. While ruling on lgbts getting jobs..the same Supreme ct refused to hear the Qualified Immunity case....Ridiculous, offensive and should be outright criminal in light of what is being brought to the light.

[@angelosvlahos]

Because he's a decent human being

[@maryannehorn2593]

kavanaugh is not sad he voted against this!

[@petermajewski8960]

Neither is all of sane America! We are damn proud of him!

[@robertpalmer8430]

@@petermajewski8960 Still spreading your BS opinion? I bet your racist as well

[@jonathansmith9235]

@@petermajewski8960 Does your lack of intelligence never cease to amaze you?

[@porsche911sbs]

You think Kavanaugh is bad but he's to the left of Alito and Thomas. Those two are the most hardline conservatives on the bench.

[@alanwayte432]

Peter Majewski well I am not proud of this man...equality is not aspirational ...Peter do you not have a Mother/Sister..don’t you want them not to be discriminated against..what does sexual preference have to do with job performance

[@JoaquinLomeliJr]

*HAPPY PRIDE MONTH!!!!* This is great news for LGBT people during pride month! We are all equal in the workplace

[@jdnb86]

Congrats to the lgbt community for the win. Let’s hope the equality keep coming in their direction

[@flz9231]

People shouldn’t be fired for being against black lives matter , do you agree ? Or are you going to be a hypocrite ?

[@Wanda_RSA]

@@flz9231 so you don't think that black lives matter?

[@flz9231]

Simon 047 do you think black fetuses matter ? In New York City , 60% of black pregnancies end with abortions.

[@DA-eo7og]

@@flz9231 Do you remember what it was like when you were in your mother's womb?Do you think that a woman who has been raped should stay pregnant even if she did not want to? Do you think a woman who could die in childbirth, get pregnant and change her life for the life of a child?Do you think that a woman and a child who will surely die should wait until childbirth for both mother and child to die, to take 2 lives instead of one?Do you think a teenage mother should get pregnant just because a condom broke? Do you think that a person should get pregnant if that child cannot support, both she and the child suffer?Should a person’s whole life end when she gets pregnant because of one stupid decision?And, no you shouldn't be fired because you don't support BLM, everyone has the right to their opinions, no matter how stupid, racist, idiotic they may be.

[@Impotantmink]

@@flz9231 do a little research on Richard nixon and his thoughts on abortion regarding the black community. He literally wanted to make sure less white people had abortions. This is still part of our system.

[@michaelbest7872]

I agree with Neil Gorsuch's quote that this video shared. "An employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender defiles the law." According to the constitution (the law), Just being Gay doesn't mean there is a right, or legitimate cause to discriminate against that person. For me, It's only what that person DOES, or acts, that causes, or justifies "a right to fire." i.e. they represent what a company does not. Women didn't have the right to vote, until 1919. Before that, people had the belief that a woman's view on politics and other things had no value! Most of us know today, that was wrong thinking. Mostly NONE of us today, would suggest that a woman voting is wrong! Of course it isn't! But back then, Women weren't allowed to have jobs, and then certain jobs... What I'm saying is that an employer firing a woman just because she's a woman is wrong. The same is true with Firing a gay or transgender person. JUST because they are so, "defiles the law also." According to our constitution, we cannot discriminate.

[@purple6188]

YEP! ALL LAWS ON THE LAND ARE POLITICAL IDEOLOGY! NOW, ALL PEOPLE MATTER! SEE, THAT WAS EASY! YEAH! :D

[@malcolmledger176]

Kavanaugh is the Susan Collins of the Supreme Court. "I'm really concerned / sorry, but I'm going to vote Trump anyway."

[@bensonfang1868]

His predecessor was deemed a moderate. Justice Kennedy personally recommended Kavanaugh personally to trump

[@tribblebooth1224]

What America does today, the world did many years ago.

[@MatrixUniverse1]

Yeah, especially Putin and his crony Ramzan Kadyrov.

[@chaosXP3RT]

Except most of Africa, or Asia

[@AriKariG]

yeah thats why everyone wants to immigrate here. Because were so behind. Im sure thats why.

[@gavin2915]

@Marianne Havisham yea its troubling to see all the places where discrimination against gay people or trans people is legal

[@armageddonisuponus7378]

@@AriKariG said by a not smart person!😂

[@jamesrichard7251]

This is a step forward, good job.

[@petermajewski8960]

10 steps backwards. God help this country. It has become pathetic!

[@pokerface8242]

@@petermajewski8960 Pete, Pete, Pete, calm down. This decision has got you all riled up. There is a place for you homophobic (it is a word) good 'ol boys. It's called the South. But don't worry about having to hire LGBTQ employees- you don't seem like a boss too many people would want to work for.

[@incipidsigninsetup]

How is this ruling anything but expected? The idea that you can fire anyone for their sexual orientation is ridiculous on it's face. The idea that the most learned and practiced minds in the law would come up with any other decision seems crazy to me. This is clearly a win but this vibe that people honestly thought it could go the other way says a lot about the state of American "freedom".

[@tetoalmonzeto2579]

So if this is correct by your statement, nobody who's white supremacist should have any problems...i mean it would anti American to cut White Supremacists short

[@petermajewski8960]

yea, and the USSC said we can kill babies if the mother dosent want them. Who would have thought that vote would go that way too

[@puttentanesame6687]

Let's crack down, fire and discriminate against known ADULTERERS who PAY OFF mistresses and weaken America's moral fiber! (crickets chirping loudly while doing windmill taps...)

[@flz9231]

Or what about senators that fingerbang their interns ?

[@sharonsmelser2491]

@@flz9231 Or what about accusers who change their story from NO sexual innuendo to molestation in less than 2 months? RNC + $ = Anything you wanna hear.

[@silveraxe301]

@@sharonsmelser2491 Ekzbin.info/www/bejne/qZXSZqNpg8eJkK8

[@JessieBanana]

A long time coming. It's been crazy that we got the right to get married, but could still get fired from work. Your marriage certificate is a public record, so getting married in and of itself could out you to your employer.

[@petermajewski8960]

Your marriage is not recognized as a marriage any more than if I married my dog and said we are married. How the hell did this country loose it's way so badly? Makes me want to leave this perverted land and move to Russia! At least they know the difference between a man and a woman! and btw, I'm still not hiring any of you

[@shirleyrombough8173]

Peter Majewski - Yes, why don't you just run to Russia, since you can't handle freedom? And why don't you take bone spurs bunker boy with you? You'll have a lot more to deal with than just the sexual orientation of your neighbors.

[@RaymondHng]

@@petermajewski8960 Your dog cannot be married to you because your dog is not able to sign the application for a marriage license. Two people of the same sex, however, can sign the application and can therefore be married. The Supreme Court decision of _Obergefell v. Hodges_ ruled that two people of the same-sex can marry.

[@iprobablywontseeyourreply.7193]

Is Alito expecting the SC to vote on behalf of what Scalia would’ve wanted? He’s gone.

[@jthomas196]

Didn't protect anyone's rights in a "Right to work" state. 😒

[@AlexH-nt1gg]

Gorush was appointed for his pro-coporate rulings, not for his social stance. Why are people surprised?

[@dwj77]

It was Illegal? What my staff do in there bedrooms (or wherever), or how many they do it with has absolutely no bearing on their employment.

[@LittleMonkey425]

Exactly, it’s like homophobic people are always thinking about what lgbtq people do in the bedroom

[@4014Thugsy]

I have to preface this with THIS IS A JOKE "I dont Mind straight people as long as they act Gay in public" So many times when I was growing up I heard the exact opposite... So people would tolerate GLBTQ people as long as they "acted" straight. I dont know about you but I live in 2020 where people accept each other, not acting like we still live in the 1950s.

[@intercat4907]

My favorite, just for the fun of this: Overheard at the next table: "Oh, I know. All the good ones are either married or straight." (Delighted double-take.)

[@akiokoh7481]

okay but i gotta put it out there.. 99% of the time i accept gay people and im honestly happy around them.. but theres this 1% of them who are aggressive af and DEMANDS you to call them stupid gender neutral terms.. like those imma sock'em in the jaw..

[@akiokoh7481]

@Mark Victor get over what?

[@RIXRADvidz]

even if he did vote with the bigots, it would have been 4 to 5 in favor, it would have passed.

[@nosecandie3890]

People are actually asking why is this topic still a debate yet you have police officers murdering black people with zero accountability. 🤔

[@darkwinter8]

The sad part is that discriminating people will still find some poor excuse to "lay off" an employee they don't like.

[@philiphammar]

Good! Now let's continue our fight against sexism.

[@philiphammar]

@K H True

[@carlosvargas5334]

Finally 😘😘😘

[@rebeccamd7903]

Not to diminish the importance of what they’re discussing because it does impact my life...however...is that a schematic drawing of The Legion of Doom headquarters on Jeffrey Toobin’s wall? LoL

[@Pbdave1092]

Jeffrey got this wrong. Gorsuch didn't recontextualize the meaning of sex in the law. Gorsuch (and probably the the other Conservative SCJ) believes that when a biological man decides to present himself as a woman, he should not be punished for it because if a biological woman decides to present herself as a woman she isn't punished for it. If you punish a biological man for presenting himself as a woman, it would be discrimination because the action (presenting oneself as a woman) is only punished because he is a biological man, which is well within, even the limited interpretation of the protections of the law on (biological) sex discrimination. And that is fucking brilliant.

[@intercat4907]

i just went through that same paragraph three times. It feels good, doesn't it? Hope your excellent post gets read and re-read many times.

[@Pbdave1092]

@@intercat4907 imagine applying Gorsuch's logic to every law that gives protection or other rights based on biological sex! A woman marrying another woman? Nope, you can't punish someone for that, because if a man marries a woman, you wouldn't even bat an eye! That's protecting gay people. Reassignment surgery? Can't punish people for that too, because if an intersex person (person who has two biological sex organ from birth) chooses what they want as a "final" sex you won't be punishing them. That's protecting transpeople. There's a lot this can do.

[@terenceheesch8351]

honestly, i think Trump fucked up with Neil Gorsuch...he thought he was getting a strict conservative and instead he actually got a conservative who knows the difference between right and wrong instead of being just a follower...so, in a way, Trump accidentally made a good choice thinking he made a bad choice...

[@milvertonmom50]

The 3 dissenters are dinosaurs. (and awful people too).

[@butchlane4609]

It's a rather stunning reality that this is even still a discussion. How can a country that makes constant claims of being number one in the world, still be debating racial or LGBTQ discrimination, abortion, or even healthcare.? Claims of being the best should motivate an awareness and at the very least a willingness to provide the best for its citizens. Countries like Canada or the UK are far more progressive and have addressed these matters and put protections in place decades ago. The Canadian Human Rights Act was amended to specifically include sexual orientation as one of the prohibited grounds of discrimination in 1996, twenty-four years ago. Same-sex marriage in Canada was legally recognized with the enactment of the Civil Marriage Act in 2005, fifteen years ago. Canadians and the British both enjoy healthcare extended to all citizens, no matter their income level. Canadians don't have to sell their homes if they get sick, they don't pay to have a child and new parents get up to 18 months parental leave from their jobs with protections in place that guarantee them that job or its equivalent upon their return. The United States appears to be going backwards in so many ways.

[@steffenlib1382]

I cringed whene you used britain as a example here. All those rights you are talking about will be up in the air in just a few months

[@astridlynden4589]

This is a great day. One more step toward humanitarianism.

[@evolvedape9171]

Thank you Justice Gorsuch.

[@veronicastewart1112]

Before Gorsuch was confirmed, he was described as being an independent thinker. So he's going to uphold the LAW and not the GOP. Too bad, Moscow Mitch, he's appointed for life and this will backfire many times. It's amusing.

[@davidellis5141]

Trump will be busy on Twitter tonight. 😆

[@michelles4]

Can’t you be a conservative and a supporter of gay rights? I know I am.

[@johnnykay7411]

Let's deliver one million cans of Coke to Clarence Thomas for old time's sake, and to honor the very Honorable Professor Anita Hill.

[@degromfan]

You mean the liar Anita Hill?

[@johnnykay7411]

@@degromfan I mean the Honorable Anita Hill who should be elevated to The Supreme Court.

[@degromfan]

@@johnnykay7411 so you think Clarence Thomas is a rapist.

[@johnnykay7411]

@@degromfan It would seem you've just declared that he must be. Can you explain why you'd do such a thing and on an open forum where your truer intent may just have surfaced in such an unlikely manner.

[@degromfan]

@@johnnykay7411 I don't think Clarence Thomas is a rapist.

[@romeror7027]

I have being scratching my head for the past 25 yea, about this. What kind of freedom is a country offering if a person can't love or married whomever he/she wants?

[@michaelmarceau4863]

It's a sad time we live in when we question a person for doing the right thing.

[@monicamatthews2960]

I thought the “Court” is there to be objective and is there to protect your rights as a human being and the supreme court’s being the highest.🤷🏽‍♀️ conservative/liberal is your opinion but you should be objective as a judge, I just don’t get it but glad they were able to protect lgbtq community, it’s their right.

[@swagkelly5867]

Monica Matthews The court is there to interpret laws already on the books. In this case, the decision wasn’t whether or not LGBTQ people deserve rights, but whether or not Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave those rights to them. To vote against this is to say that law doesn’t protect those rights, not that there shouldn’t be other legislation that should

[@gregbryant516]

It sounds like this case came down to what " you cant discriminate based on sex" meant to the each Justice

[@LuckyBaldwin777]

or each justice's agenda

[@mechmat12345]

Justices often back into their opinions. This case was no different, Gorsuch was just less of a bigot than the right thought when they nominated him. This is a major defeat for the right, they put a tremendous amount of stock in Supreme Court appointments because they see that their power is fleeting, and it won't be long before the Oval Office is nothing but a pipe dream for traditional conservatives.

[@CaptainOscarBarbosa]

Because he probably has one of his kids or someone close to him this helped which is a good thing

[@gwen3010]

Thank you to all the Supreme Court Justices that supported the hundreds of thousands American citizens on the bases of their HUMAN RIGHTS afforded to all AMERICANS!!! GOD is the judgement of men/women NOT men or women we live in the 21st Century and OUR views must change as it always has and will continue.

[@willysnowman]

Trump was supposed to personally direct them how to vote, but there was a small slight ramp in the way.

[@BFDT-4]

Now this is more than just a cake.

[@petermajewski8960]

Well, means nothing to me. I sure as hell still won't bake that cake.

[@pamelawing626]

A good day. They are very few and far between these days.

[@NaNa-er4sw]

My god there humans too, and should be protected as other of the country 🥺

[@xBINARYGODx]

To the judges points in some of things they wrong up after they made their decisions: A man is with a man. (we call it gay, and always talk about it in terms of sexuality and not sex) A woman is with a man. (we call it straight, and always talk about it in terms of sexuality and not sex) BUT - If you fire the man for being with a man and not the woman for being with a man, then you are in fact violating that law because the difference is in fact based on the sex of the person, and not simply the sexuality of the people. If you cannot fire the woman for being with a man, then you cannot fire the man for being with a man, because you are basing it on the sex of the person, and that is illegal under current law (to fire someone based on sex). Furthermore - if you fire a trans-woman/trans-man but not a man/woman, then you are still basing your decision on sex - that what they are now is not what they use to be, they changed their sex - and since you cannot fire/etc. based on sex, then the changing of sex is also covered.

[@London_miss234]

Human rights. I’m not LGBTQ, however, I support the right to work regardless of sexual orientation.

[@erzan]

How many Old, White, Men do we need? CNN: Yes.

[@adawgisagangster]

Pale, male, stale

[@triplekillerable]

You're more racist then they are. Just because they are old and white makes them idiot? Or you think being black makes u better than white?

[@TheBubblegum420]

Hahaha trump supporters ? Is this the " winning "you voted for ?????

[@petermajewski8960]

What's done can always be UNDONE!

[@DA-eo7og]

@@petermajewski8960 Unfortunately it can't, believe me millions of people would like the Trump never to exist, simply wearing a condom could prevent all this.In fact, that would be a good advertisement: "Wear condoms if you don't want to have a child like Donald Trump in the future, because your awareness could save the world from World War 3"

[@darlingba]

This is something that we all was waiting for it for a long time and effort but the job is not done by any means. to allow this type of discrimination to go on was going to be a massive problem in our society.

[@petermajewski8960]

I don't give a shit what some court said. I still won't hire them!

[@johnrtaylormba4225]

Votes should have been 9-0. No one should be discriminated against for any reason. Job performance has nothing to do with being gay or transgender

[@cmvamerica9011]

They won’t ever be hired or they will be fired for some other reason,

[@mariap6271]

So what about the military?

[@intercat4907]

Still side-stepping Trump's latest whim. I'll bet they can stall until November ... but they can't keep it up forever. Let's help them out by putting a human being in the White House.

[@RaymondHng]

Gay people can serve in the military after Congress repealed Don't Ask Don't Tell.

[@glendahunt8013]

BECAUSE HE KNOWS HOW TO INTERPRET THE LAW??? Maybe that reason?

[@TByrom]

QUESTION: Does this protect lgbtq renters and customers at businesses?

[@AjaKim]

It is against the law to discriminate on the basis of sex. It will protect people’s healthcare and yes I do believe for renters and customers too. Discrimination is discrimination. We needed this.

[@TheMilk899]

No it doesn't. If you re-watch the video, it specifically discusses what appears to be an issue of legal interpretation on a piece of legislation (employment law). You would need to rely on more relevant state or federal law, that applies to tenancy and etc. Alternatively, you would need to rely on a broad-ranging law that covers all circumstances of discrimination based on sex. Not really worth my time going into the specific statute being discussed as its not my jurisdiction, but you can't cross-apply laws just because they have related characteristics or involve similar subject matter. You need to rely on laws which capture the incident in question. This might be specific or broad, but whats clear from a very quick glance is that employment law and this case would not apply as a binding rule to the situations you mentioned.

[@TheMilk899]

@@AjaKim As I mentioned in reply after you, the law is highly technical. While you are correct in principle, that discrimination is broadly rejected and people's rights are to be protected, you have to be very very very careful which law you rely on. This is the reason why the trend of being a facebook or google lawyer is a terrible idea and will cost a person dearly. If you took someone to court for an issue and quoted seemingly relevant but inapplicable and inappropriate laws/statutes, all you will do is piss the judge off because you are wasting their time (they cannot give you a decision based on what you put up) and the opposing party can apply to strike your case down. This would be the case if you wanted to sue someone for discriminating against you as a customer/tenant and supported your position with employment law.

[@TheMilk899]

@Don Hardcastle Haha, I would point to you that all heterosexuals and traditional genders (male/female) already have protection from unfair dismissal. It isn't a special 'privilege' to ensure that minorities are elevated (elevated because they were downtrodden and didn't have those 'basic' rights'). But... you clearly aren't legally trained or have any chance of ever having the sort of power wielded by lawyers or judges in shaping society. So... I won't waste my time :( Enjoy your opinions though! Everyone has one.

[@sfreddy]

@Don Hardcastle My question to you is this:: Why do you consider this, "Special rights". Straight people cannot be fired for being straight. Different rights would be that straight people cannot be fired for being straight (Which they cannot) but Gay people can. (Which they have been able to) So really, from the perspective of logic, this is just giving gay people the same rights as everyone else which does not equate as, "Special rights".

[@rw7632]

This ruling is of no consequence. Every law against any kind of harassment is already in place. But I'm sure it makes everyone feel better.

[@rw7632]

@K H You can't be fired without cause. You can't be evicted without cause. You are full of crap.

[@HOPEisforEVERYONE]

I guess I thought this was always the law. I mean really.... To think you could be fired because of who you love.... seems petty.

[@HOPEisforEVERYONE]

@K H wow. I am really sorry to hear that. My son told me I was someone who loves based not on gender.... I was like doesn't every one. And he said no there's a word for it.... I was shocked. I have loved women, and men equally. It's about the person to me. And I'm proud my son feels the same. Love is gender biased

[@HOPEisforEVERYONE]

Or doesn't see gender.... which ever makes most sense

[@kalijasin]

Trump appointee going against Trumpian Homophobia.

[@flz9231]

Trump is not homophobic, cnn has lied to you

[@petermajewski8960]

There is no such thing as homophobia. It's a made up non nonsensical word. There is such a word as perverted though.

[@vinnyvsalval]

Monumental decision on interpreting the phrase " on the basis of sex".

[@dianeowen2971]

Good Lord U.S. c'mon join us in the 21rst century.

[@petermajewski8960]

No, the Lord wont be joining something like this. As a matter of fact I believe he is pretty disappointed today!

[@muj3595]

I'm as conservative as they get but I just don't understand why you would discriminate against anyone based on their sexuality.

[@y1521t21b5]

6-3 was a surprise. I expect there will be fewer of them going forward.