Kavanaugh's Answers About the Obergefell Same-Sex Marriage Case and Discrimination Are Disturbing

[Behind the Aegis]

Judge Brett Kavanaugh is refusing to say if he agrees the historic 2015 Obergefell Supreme Court ruling finding same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marriage was correctly decided. He also is refusing to say if he thinks the days of discriminating against LGBT people are over.

Late Thursday during his Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing (video below) the Trump nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court faced one of his greatest opponents, Democratic Senator Kamala Harris. Harris, her state's former Attorney General for six years, and the District Attorney of San Francisco for seven years prior, is possibly one of the most precise questioners any modern-day Supreme Court nominee has ever faced.

"My question is, was the Obergefell case correctly decided, in your opinion," Sen. Harris asked.

Judge Kavanaugh, clearly prepared for the question – and for ways to not answer it – found a multitude of ways around it. As several watching the hearing noted, he instead "mansplained" to the accomplished California Senator.

---snip--

When all was said and done, Kavanaugh refused to answer.

more...

When all is said, and done, it will be THIS case which will likely be one of the first to go. The rights of the LGBT community hang in the balance, and frankly, IMO, many people don't seem to be all that concerned.

[riversedge]

1. I hate sleazy answers.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

6. slippery and sleazy

Behind every sleazy lawyer is a sleazy client.

Behind every sleazy Republican is another sleazy Republican. It's what they do.

[LandOfHopeAndDreams]

2. I'm Concerned

Not much I or anyone here can do about it though. He's going to be one of the most powerful individuals in this country, with the ability to make laws, and it's sadly inevitable.

[mahina]

4. I just disagree.

There are opportunities to make our voices heard. I don’t have any appetite for giving up before the votes are counted and see no point in it.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

7. no hope and lost dreams?

This is not the first message of despair and hopelessness you've posted about the Kavanaugh hearings.

Surrender before the battle is not exactly a winning strategy.

[bronxiteforever]

3. Kick and recommend for visibility

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

5. EVERYTHING about that creep is disturbing!!

[Nitram]

8. "many people don't seem to be all that concerned"?

I beg to disagree. Many of us are extremely concerned and feel powerless to do anything, just hoping our Democrats to pull something off.

[Behind the Aegis]

9. I don't see it at all.

I see people concerned about the nomination, but it is almost always in regards to Roe V. Wade and civil rights, and Citizen's United like rulings. Rarely do articles or commenters bring up the issue of GLBT rights, especially in regards to the recently passed, and done during the Obama administration, Obergefell decision. So, disagree all you want, I was specifically talking about a lack of concern in regards to LGBT matters.

[Nitram]

10. Again, I beg to differ. A number of media sources have commented on the danger to the LGBTQ

community.

Human Rights Campaign ...released a statement saying that "his record is clear: Brett Kavanaugh poses a direct threat to LGBTQ equality, reproductive rights, affordable health care, immigrants’ rights, workers’ rights and so much more.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/09/07/kavanaughs-non-answer-same-sex-marriage-many-heard-troubling-answer/?utm_term=.0003694fe8fb

Kavanaugh’s views that religious people or organizations experience discrimination could also play a role in cases that could arise out of new policies, enacted by the Trump administration, that create legal mechanisms for conservatives to raise conscience objections to, for example, laws protecting LGBT or reproductive rights.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2018/09/07/to-trump-kavanaughs-testimony-about-religious-liberty-made-him-worth-the-pick/?utm_term=.05423b4b3e13

Gay-rights supporters who thronged the Supreme Court plaza after justices declared same-sex marriage a constitutional right expect to have little to celebrate if Brett Kavanaugh replaces Justice Anthony Kennedy, the author of all the court’s major gay-rights rulings...“One of the primary battlegrounds for both LGBTQ rights and reproductive rights will be around religious exemptions, an area where we have already seen Judge Kavanaugh favor those seeking exceptions over those who are being denied services,” GLAAD President Sarah Kate Ellis wrote in an email.

https://apnews.com/47537133ca5042f88e5f55df9a94ec3f

If Kavanaugh were to form a court majority for overturning the landmark Roe v. Wade decision on abortion and the right to privacy, "that would have implications including on LGBTQ cases that were built upon that legal theory," said Sarah Warbelow, legal director of the Human Rights Campaign.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lgbt-advocates-fear-brett-kavanaughs-votes-on-gay-rights-issues/

Democrats are warning that Trump's nominee would jeopardize some of progressives' most important policy priorities in recent decades -- including rulings that legalized abortion and same-sex marriage

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/09/politics/trump-supreme-court-pick/index.html

[Behind the Aegis]

11. Again, a few excerpts do not discount "rarely".

LGBT issues are the afterthought.

[Nitram]

12. Can't admit you're wrong, can you?

That was by no means every example I found during a brief 5-minute search. Even three examples should discount "rarely," unless English isn't your first language.