Current Events > Trump Admin asks SCOTUS to make it legal to ban same-sex couples from adopting

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2020/06/trump-administration-asks-supreme-court-make-legal-ban-sex-couples-adopting/

The Trump administration wants the Supreme Court to rule in favor of a foster and adoption agency that bans same-sex couples, saying that denying a contract to the Catholic agency for rejecting LGBTQ people violates its religious freedom.

Trump administration attorneys including U.S. Solicitor General Noel Francisco signed a brief in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, a lawsuit Catholic Social Services (CSS) filed against Philadelphia when the city told them they couldnt refuse LGBTQ parents anymore.

CSS is one of the dozens of agencies in Philadelphia that work with potential foster and adoptive parents and place children. The organization claims that its religious beliefs force it to categorically refuse to work with same-sex couples, but it does not refuse single parents or unmarried opposite-sex couples.

Philadelphia found out that the group discriminates against LGBTQ people in 2018 and suspended its contract with them, citing an ordinance that bans discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The city said that it would reinstate the contract if the agency stopped discriminating.

Thats when CSS sued, saying that their religious freedom was violated since its religious beliefs include the belief that same-sex couples are bad parents.

A federal judge ruled against CSS, saying that the citys anti-discrimination law does not constitute a substantial burden for the organization it can work with same-sex couples even if it frowns on homosexuality, just like it works with other potential parents who arent Catholic.

The Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, stating that CSS failed to make a persuasive showing that the city targeted it for its religious beliefs. The ban on discrimination was applied to all agencies of all religions, the court decided, which made it neutral.

Now the U.S. Supreme Court will hear the case, and the Trump administration wants the court to force cities to grant contracts to agencies that discriminate against LGBTQ people because of religious freedom.

The brief argues that the ban on discrimination against LGBTQ people is itself a form of religious discrimination because discriminating against LGBTQ people is religious conduct.

Governmental action tainted by hostility to religion fails strict scrutiny almost by definition, the Trump administration argues. Adoption of a law in reaction to particular religious conduct may suggest that the government is impermissibly targeting religious exercise, rather than simply targeting a given type of conduct without regard to its religious motivation.

The Trump administration also accuses the city of giving other agencies exemptions to its anti-discrimination act, like allowing agencies to refuse potential parents with physical disabilities. The brief says that that is a secular exemption to the anti-discrimination rule, which shows that Philadelphia is violating the First Amendment by not allowing religious exemptions to the rule.

But by tolerating secular reasons for imposing such costs [that is, allowing agencies to refuse disabled parents], yet refusing to accept religious reasons for imposing the same costs, the City is devalu[ing] religious reasons and judging them to be of lesser import than nonreligious reasons,' the Trump administration brief argues.

The Trump administration brief cites the Supreme Courts Masterpiece Cakeshop decision repeatedly sometimes multiple times per page. In that case, a baker in Colorado refused to sell a cake to a same-sex couple that was going to get married, arguing that same-sex marriage was against his religion.

The Supreme Court in that case didnt say that discrimination against LGBTQ people is protected by the First Amendment, but it found that Colorado officials made comments that it believed were not deferential enough to Christianity. It sent the case back down to the state without ruling against the states anti-discrimination law.

The Trump administration is trying to use that decision to force local and state governments to work with adoption and fostering agencies that discriminate against LGBTQ people, effectively showing that legal decisions about homophobic bakers are about much more than cake.

LGBTQ advocates argue that allowing adoption agencies to discriminate against same-sex couples will ultimately harm children in foster care by reducing the families available to take them in.

While this case involves rejecting LGBTQ families, if the court accepts the claims made in this case, not only will this hurt children in foster care by reducing the number of families to care for them, but anyone who depends on a wide range of government services will be at risk of discrimination based on their sexual orientation, religion or any other characteristic that fails a providers religious litmus test, the ACLUs Leslie Cooper said in a statement.

The Trump administration has argued against protecting LGBTQ people from discrimination in court before.

Multiple pending Supreme Court cases argue that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964s ban on discrimination because of sex includes discrimination against LGBTQ people because discriminating against someone for being attracted to the wrong sex or for being assigned the wrong sex at birth is a form of sex discrimination.

Moreover, LGBTQ advocates in those cases argue that sex stereotype discrimination is already considered a form of sex discrimination, and LGBTQ people inherently break sex stereotypes.

The Trump administration, though, filed briefs in those cases asking the Supreme Court to rule against LGBTQ protections because, in part, lawmakers in 1964 didnt intend for the Civil Rights Act to apply to LGBTQ people. Instead, the Trump administration argued, Congress needs to pass its own legislation banning discrimination against LGBTQ people.

Donald Trump, though, has signaled that he would veto the Equality Act, a bill before Congress that would add sexual orientation and gender identity to existing civil rights legislation.

And, as the brief filed in Fulton suggests, even if Congress were to pass anti-discrimination legislation, the Trump administration believes that it should not apply to organizations that claim that their religious beliefs require them to discriminate against LGBTQ people.

---

Fuck Trump and fuck Trump's administration

---

#bunkerboy is racist and homophobic
---

remember when Trump said he would be the best for the lgbtq comunity dude shits on everyone but white people

oh, you mean the trump administration doesn't like gay people either?

CADE FOSTER posted...

remember when Trump said he would be the best for the lgbtq comunity dude shits on everyone but rich white people

---

Listen.

If your best argument is "stop discriminating against my discrimination"

You're a fuckwad.

---

remember all those gays for Trump at his rallies its fucking sad he screwed everyone over

I'm actually surprised that there are religious adoption and social services agencies. In my head, they were all government agencies.

---

yeah but upside-down flag!!!

---

NightRender posted...

I'm actually surprised that there are religious adoption and social services agencies. In my head, they were all government agencies.

lol, thinking the government gives a fuck about children.

---

how could we have ever seen this coming

---

our orphanages are overflowing with kids that need homes and they would willfully not allow good parents because of there sexual orientation to adopt is insane

CADE FOSTER posted...

our orphanages are overflowing with kids that need homes and they would willfully not allow good parents because of there sexual orientation to adopt is insane

yeah but think of their souls!

---

Nothing is surprising anymore from the worst President in living memory.

Tag
---

just in time for pride month
piece of shit

---

Nailing it, Mr. President.

---

Fuck off

---

CADE FOSTER posted...

our orphanages are overflowing with kids that need homes and they would willfully not allow good parents because of there sexual orientation to adopt is insane

in their minds they think that gay parents will raise the kid to be gay too (which is horrifying to them) or also that they will molest the child. there is still a widely spread belief among conservatives that gay people are more horny and sex crazed and depraved than straight people.

monkmith posted...

remember when Trump said he would be the best for the lgbtq comunity dude shits on everyone but rich white men

---

The Trump administration also accuses the city of giving other agencies exemptions to its anti-discrimination act, like allowing agencies to refuse potential parents with physical disabilities. The brief says that that is a secular exemption to the anti-discrimination rule, which shows that Philadelphia is violating the First Amendment by not allowing religious exemptions to the rule.

But by tolerating secular reasons for imposing such costs [that is, allowing agencies to refuse disabled parents], yet refusing to accept religious reasons for imposing the same costs, the City is devalu[ing] religious reasons and judging them to be of lesser import than nonreligious reasons,' the Trump administration brief argues.

Yeah, no shit physical disabilities are more important. Presence of physical disabilities directly concerns the best interests of the child to be adopted. Satisfying a religious litmus test, especially when the test deals with sexual orientation, does not.

---

It kind of speaks to the root of the same batshit insane rationality involved in denying marriage to gay people. The world advanced on the back of family households, and its nothing but a net positive to allow people to marry a partner of their selection. On that same note, theres already a struggle to find fosters and adoptive parents without denying completely capable couples because of their orientation. Do we really want more kids in that system?

---

wait, what year is it?

---

That's not how religious freedom works dumbass.

These morons continue to fight a losing battle.

they are going wild doing anything they want till november no matter how vile and if he wins again pretty sure all bets are off as to the amount of fucked up things he will do with no re election to fight for

Both sides are the same though

---

seems bad imo

---

Imagine supporting this fool lol

Reminder that conservatives believe gays to subhuman degenerates who don't deserve the same rights as everyone else. This move should not be surprising.

---

The article's not kidding about how often the cake incident is referenced though, holy shit.
---

ImAMarvel posted...

and also lol @ the trump administration thinking THIS is what matters when the nation is burning down. never mind that it's also morally wrong to ban gay couples from adopting anyhow

at this point its obvious he's ticking every conservative box in hopes he'll be able to pull as many voters to the ballot as possible.

---

ImAMarvel posted...

It was so funny seeing some gays support trump, saying shit like, "Daddy Trump is going to do so much for us!" like why the fuck would he even remotely like or give a fuck about you

and also lol @ the trump administration thinking THIS is what matters when the nation is burning down. never mind that it's also morally wrong to ban gay couples from adopting anyhow

Except it is what matters, one way or another the protests will come to an end. But a Supreme Court ruling would take another lifetime to undo. It's why McConnell betrayed the Constitution to keep Garland out, it's why they've been packing the courts, and why they salivate at any news of illness to Ginsburg. If they were able to replace Ginsburg with another conservative they wouldn't need to win another election for 20 years and they'd still have a lock on the keeping the country exactly the way they want it.

It goes against the religious beliefs of the organization. It's the same thing with the guy who owns chic fila who donates to anti same sex groups. If you dont agree dont go to them as a customer. Easy solution

glassparkinglot posted...

It goes against the religious beliefs of the organization. It's the same thing with the guy who owns chic fila who donates to anti same sex groups. If you dont agree dont go to them as a customer. Easy solution

little orphaned kids is customers now?

---

glassparkinglot posted...

It goes against the religious beliefs of the organization. It's the same thing with the guy who owns chic fila who donates to anti same sex groups. If you dont agree dont go to them as a customer. Easy solution

If this is the case then they shouldn't be forced to adopt out to gay couples.

I'd also question why a gay couple is trying to adopt from a Catholic Adoption Agency

I don't believe gays should be restricted legally from adopting kids but also don't think a religiously motivated business/agency should be forced to adopt out kids to those they don't find suitable, whether or not I agree with their definition of suitable. They're free to do as they please, and they're free to lose all the customers their ideology costs them.

---

monkmith posted...

little orphaned kids is customers now?

He's talking about couples seeking to adopt

---

monkmith posted...

little orphaned kids is customers now?

No how does an orphan adopt another orphan

My point is if you dont like the business model dont shop there

wackyteen posted...

He's talking about couples seeking to adopt

ah, so the orphans are cake?

---

ImAMarvel posted...

It was so funny seeing some gays support trump, saying shit like, "Daddy Trump is going to do so much for us!" like why the fuck would he even remotely like or give a fuck about you

and also lol @ the trump administration thinking THIS is what matters when the nation is burning down. never mind that it's also morally wrong to ban gay couples from adopting anyhow

Better to do heinous stuff while nobody is looking

---

And if they can't comply with the licensing requirements, they don't have to be in the business.

---

"SIR! Everyone is rioting in the streets and the military is disobeying your orders and sending the 82nd home! They're spreading disease AND the economy is tanking with over 40 million unemployed! What should we do?!"

"I think we should ban gay people from adopting"

---

ThePieReborn posted...

And if they can't comply with the licensing requirements, they don't have to be in the business.

It sounds like this challenge is to allow them to deny gay couples.

Which in a world where all things are equal, is fair. Because gay couples aren't forced to go to the Catholic Adoption Agency.

However this world isn't a place where all things are equal.

---

There's an anti-discrimination ordinance that they failed to comply with, and any contract with a city is going to include a "Violation of any and all statutes, ordinances, and regulations will be treated as a breach of this contract and the City reserves the right to terminate this contract in the occurrence of such a breach."

Assuming the drafters weren't idiots.

---

Huh...

---