#obergefell v. hodges | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

dontmeantobepoliticalbut · 9 months

Text

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) on Sunday warned of an “authoritarian expansion of power” by the Supreme Court after it released several controversial opinions in it’s last week of the term.

“The courts, if they were to proceed without any check on their power, without any balance on their power, then we will start to see an undemocratic and, frankly, dangerous authoritarian expansion of power in the Supreme Court,” Ocasio-Cortez said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

“Which is what we are seeing now, from the overturning of abortion rights to the ruling that discrimination and, frankly, stripping the full personhood and dignity of LGBTQ people in the United States. … These are the types of rulings that signal a dangerous creep towards authoritarianism and centralization of power in the court,” the New York Democrat said.

The Supreme Court last week released opinions on several landmark decisions that included blows to affirmative action programs in college admissions, President Biden’s student debt relief program, and LGBTQ rights — rulings Republicans have largely lauded and Democrats have decried.

Ocasio-Cortez, a frequent critic of the conservative court, on Sunday argued that Justices “are expanding their role into acting as though they are Congress itself,” noting recent controversies surrounding ethics standards and arguing Justices’ power should be limited.

“And that, I believe, is an expansion of power that we really must be focusing on: the danger of this Court and the abuse of power in this Court, particularly … as it is related to the entanglements around conflicts of interest as well,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

#us politics #news #Democrats #rep. alexandria ocasio cortez #progressives #2023 #us supreme court #scotus #cnn's state of the union #roe v. wade #obergefell v. hodges #biden v. nebraska #students for fair admissions v. harvard #303 creative v. elenis #the hill

150 notes · View notes

dailyhistoryposts · 2 years

Text

On This Day In History

June 26th, 2003: The Supreme Court of the United States rules in Lawrence v. Texas that gender-based anti-sodomy laws are unconstitutional, based on the same "right to privacy" that Roe v. Wade helped to establish. It is a 6-3 ruling.

June 26th, 2013: The Supreme Court of the Unites States rules in United States v. Windsor that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that denied federal recognition of same-sex marriages was unconstitutional, based on the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. It is a 5-4 ruling.

June 26th, 2015: The Supreme Court of the United States rules in Obergefell v. Hodges that the fundamental right to legally recognized marriages must be extended to same-sex couples, based on the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. It is a 5-4 ruling.

#history #gay history #queer history #politics #supreme court #Lawrence v. Texas #sodomy #United States v. Windsor #gay marriage #gay rights #Obergefell v. Hodges #civil partnerships

1K notes · View notes

ventmyfrustrations · 9 months

Text

what was that about them NOT going after obergefell

so that new “businesses have the right to refuse queer people” rule sucks ass btw

#obergefell v. hodges #politics #us politics #gay rights #Texas #current events #hellscape #worst timeline #added image description btw

101 notes · View notes

dontmean2bepoliticalbut · 2 years

Text

1K notes · View notes

aficionadoenthusiast · 1 year

Text

did anyone ever explain to hazel that the US has anti segregation laws now? I mean, the girl went straight from the 1940s to the underworld to camp jupiter, does she know she can use any bathroom she wants or is she still looking for white and colored signs?

also, it's been a while since I read the books, so I'm not sure on the timeline, but does nico know about obergefell v. hodges? does he know he and will can legally be married?

actually, what does hazel know about recent women's history in america? does she know she can tell men to fuck off and not be arrested? did anyone tell her her employer has to provide equal pay (assuming she ever decides to venture into the mortal world)? does she know about roe v. wade and contraceptive laws??

does nico know about the immigrant and nationality act (is nico a legal immigrant? is he considered an immigrant at all? did hades somehow fast track nico and bianca's citizenship or did he just create fake birth certificates and social security cards? i feel like he'd have had to do one of those for them to go to that school)

do they know that they're considered protected classes?

do they know their rights??

256 notes · View notes

drumcorpshero · 2 years

Text

Married LGBTQ people: CALL A LAWYER.

Get copies of birth certificates and custody for your children on paper. Make sure life insurance policies, property that you own, bank account information, passwords for things, Powers of Attorney, etc. are all set up & understood

#drumcorpshero #obergefell v. hodges

598 notes · View notes

thoughtportal · 1 year

Video

TN House Passes Bill Letting Clerks Refuse Marriage Licenses to LGBTQ Couples

https://truthout.org/articles/tn-house-passes-bill-letting-clerks-refuse-marriage-licenses-to-lgbtq-couples/

The Republican-controlled Tennessee state House of Representatives voted on Monday to pass a bill that would allow county officials to deny same-sex or interracial couples marriage licenses.

House Bill 878 states that county clerks and their staff “shall not be required to solemnize a marriage if the person has an objection to solemnizing the marriage based on the person’s conscience or religious beliefs.” The bill now heads to the Senate, which will begin consideration of its passage in the chamber next week.

If the bill becomes state law, it would directly challenge federal marriage equality protections, including Supreme Court rulings and the recently-passed Respect for Marriage Act.

The Respect for Marriage Act, which passed in the last congressional session and was signed into law by President Joe Biden, requires states to recognize same-sex marriage licenses from other states but does not require them to issue same-sex marriage licenses themselves — meaning that if federal marriage equality protections are ever undone by the conservative-led Supreme Court, states would be able to deny same-sex couples the right to marry.

Federal marriage equality protections have been in place since 2015, when the Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that states must grant same-sex couples the right to marry. Decades earlier, in the 1967 case Loving v. Virginia , the Court ruled that states could not ban interracial marriages.

#tiktok #article #marriage equality #marriage #human rights #Obergefell v. Hodges #loving v. virginia #Respect for Marriage Act #Tennessee #lgbtq rights #lgbtq history #LGBTQ #House Bill 878

36 notes · View notes

house-of-crows · 2 years

Text

In light of the News-

I am saying this as an AFAB person who no longer has a uterus due to cancer and has no ability to bear children at this point in time:

This is the time to remember that the last time we didn’t have abortion rights in this country there wasn’t a 24/7 electronic tracker in every afab person’s pocket.

DO NOT TALK ABOUT YOUR PLANS ON THE INTERNET. DO NOT TALK ABOUT YOUR PLANS VIA TEXT OR PHONE CALL.

Look up VPNs and who, where, and how they share your data. If you have a “women’s health” appointment in the near future, GO. Talk to your providers about permanent/semi-permanent birth control while you can. If you can, use a different internet source altogether if you have to access these.

r/Childfree has a list of doctors by state and province that are willing to sterilize you, give you an IUD, salpingectomy, etc.

There is also AidAccess, AuntieNetwork, and your local abortion fund.

REMEMBER: there are currently legal, safe ways of terminating a pregnancy. DO NOT TELL VULNERABLE PEOPLE TO TAKE HERBS. They WILL be doing toxicology testing, and the currently available legal drugs do not show up. It looks like a naturally occuring miscarriage. TELL YOUR PROVIDERS you are experiencing a miscarriage. It is the truth!

We do not have to go back to wire coat hangers and dangerous life-endangering methods at this point. Use the resources available to you, wherever possible.

---

Currently 13 states have trigger laws that go into effect the MOMENT Roe V Wade falls, and between 24-28 are planning to ban abortion altogether if Roe v Wade is overturned. There are a LOT of laws based on Roe, and our right to privacy in our own homes is under fire because of this. Certain laws were mentioned BY NAME in the opinion leak, so do not believe that this is an AFAB-Only issue. IT IS NOT.

#Roe V Wade #Abortion Rights #Women's Health Care #abortion access #autonomy #obergefell v. hodges #loving v. virginia #SCOTUS #SCOTUS Leak

160 notes · View notes

fireslaywithme · 1 year

Text

worst part about loosing twitter is my old banner not being the right shape to be repurposed on here 💔

#twin peaks #taylor swift #elon musk #lgbtq #pride edit #slaytheday #swifties #david lynch #obergefell v. hodges

43 notes · View notes

dontmeantobepoliticalbut · 1 year

Text

Following the Supreme Court’s elimination of the federal right to abortion in June, conservatives have taken aim at other fundamental protections, such as same-sex marriage and access to contraception. But some on the right are resurfacing a different, long-simmering project: stigmatizing divorce, including, in some instances, attacking no-fault divorce laws.

No-fault divorce in the U.S. was first adopted in California in 1969, and New York was the last state in the country to pass a no-fault divorce law, which it did in 2010. Although state laws differ, in general no-fault divorce means that one party can successfully dissolve a marriage without needing to first prove wrongdoing by the other partner – including adultery, abuse, or desertion.

Ohio Republican Senate nominee J.D. Vance praised the idea of staying in violent marriages in remarks to high school students in southern California last September. Vance argued “all of us should be honest” about how “making it easier for people to shift spouses like they change their underwear” by leaving marriages that were “maybe even violent” had negative effects on the children, according to Vice, which first reported the comments.

Although Vance’s comments were made before the overturning of Roe v. Wade, they’ve taken on a new salience amid a conservative movement that sees formerly out-of-reach goals as newly attainable. And Vance has lots of company in right-wing media.

youtube

Reactionary YouTuber Tim Pool recently discussed no-fault divorce laws on his show, titling the clipped segment: “No-Fault Divorce Has DESTROYED Men's Confidence In Marriage, Men Don't Want To Get Married Anymore.” The discussion focused on how no-fault divorce laws were to blame for what the panel perceived to be a rise in prenuptial agreements, which segued into a meandering discussion lamenting divorce in general.

“The courts are heavily biased in favor of women to an insane degree, especially with children,” Pool said, parroting a cliche often espoused by so-called men’s rights activists, an anti-feminist movement that claims men are structurally disadvantaged in divorce proceedings and family court. (Although it is true that women are generally granted sole custody more frequently than men, the reasons for that are complicated and have to do with men historically having higher incomes and sexist ideas about mothers being natural caregivers.)

Fellow conservative YouTuber Steven Crowder has also argued that no-fault divorce laws are disincentivizing young men to get married. In an unfocused June 24 rant calling for the Supreme Court to now overturn marriage equality rights conferred in Obergefell v. Hodges, Crowder said no-fault divorce laws are “a raw deal for a lot” of men.

“Oh, it’s no-fault divorce, which, by the way, means that in many of these states if a woman cheats on you, she leaves, she takes half,” Crowder said. “So it’s not no-fault, it’s the fault of the man.”

“There need to be changes to marital laws, and I’m not even talking about same-sex marriage,” he added. “Talking about divorce laws, talking about alimony laws, talking about child support laws.”

That wasn’t the first time Crowder has made the argument. After referring to “no-fault divorce states” using air quotes in an April 22 segment, he said, “It’s the only contract that I know of where one side is financially incentivized to break it.”

“If you’re a woman that comes from meager means, and you want to get wealthy – you’ve never worked, you didn’t get a degree, you have no skill set, but you’re good-looking – your best path to victory is simply to marry a man, leave him, and take half,” Crowder added. He later reiterated that “we need to reform divorce laws in this country.”

Some of the loudest anti-LGBTQ conservative voices are also the biggest critics of no-fault divorce, in both cases making an appeal to tradition and what they see as a God-given natural order while defending nakedly patriarchal power relations. Patriarchy depends on a rigid gender binary, with clearly defined roles and expectations; conservatives believe LGBTQ identities subvert this dynamic. Similarly, no-fault divorce laws upended patriarchal power, freeing women from de facto second-class status and dependence on men.

No one encapsulates this tendency more than the virulently anti-trans conservative pundit Matt Walsh. In defending Kanye West’s harassment and threatening behavior in March toward his estranged wife Kim Kardashian, who had recently filed for divorce, Walsh also argued that it should be more arduous to dissolve marriages.

Walsh has made versions of this argument dating back to at least 2015, explicitly in the context of the supposed threat that same-sex marriage posed to heterosexual couples.

Walsh’s Daily Wire colleague Michael Knowles made the same point last year.

“We see the weakening of marriage through no-fault divorce," Knowles said. “This is a very bad turn of events.”

“Do you think society has gotten much better since the social and sexual revolutions of the 1960s? Or has it gotten a little bit worse?” Knowles asked. “Are we in a period of ascendancy or a period of decline?”

Knowles’ line is increasingly common on the right. Senior writer at National Review Online Dan McLaughlin also sees the liberation movements of the second half of the 20th century as a locus of social disintegration, recently linking gay marriage rights and no-fault divorce as twin aspects of a singular problem.

Some conservatives are even more overt in their playbook. The right’s successful campaign to overturn Roe should serve as a “path by which campaigns for social change must be patterned,” Katy Faust and Stacy Manning write at The Federalist. “That’s especially true for those still willing to fight the battle for marriage.”

Faust and Manning run Them Before Us, which describes itself as “a global movement defending children’s right to their mother and father.”

In their piece, they present a hypothetical back-and-forth that activists can use to field questions, such as:

“If you really think family is so important then you must be against divorce.”

• Correct, no-fault divorce is the original re-definition of marriage and it has devastated the American family.

(The two also oppose same-sex marriage on the grounds that “children of gay couples lose maternal or paternal love and half their heritage.”)

Others on the right downplay this trend.

“As for no-fault divorce, it’s not entirely clear that the policy — while a tragic mistake, from the social-conservative perspective—actually features prominently in the mainstream Right’s priorities. (Which Republican is campaigning on repealing no-fault divorce?)” writes Nate Hochman at National Review. To answer the rhetorical question: the Texas Republican Party, for one, which includes in its 2022 platform a proposal “to rescind unilateral no-fault divorce laws and support covenant marriage and to pass legislation extending the period of time in which a divorce may occur to six months after the date of filing for divorce.”

Justice Clarence Thomas’ concurring opinion in the Supreme Court’s recent Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe, made it clear that aspects of the right are interested in rolling back marriage equality and contraception rights. “We have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents," Thomas wrote. It’s not difficult to imagine a movement built on patriarchy targeting divorce laws next.

59 notes · View notes

usnatarchives · 2 years

Text

Stonewall Inn, 1999. NARA ID 75319963.

#OTD 1969: STONEWALL!

"The Hairpin Drop Heard Around the World."* By Miriam Kleiman, Public Affairs, in honor of dear friends MG and RW!

On June 28, 1969, the Stonewall Riots began following a police raid on the Stonewall Inn, a gay club in New York's Greenwich Village. When officers became violent, Stonewall patrons and neighbors fought back, leading to days of riots and protests that catalyzed the LGBTQ+ rights movement.

See related Happy PRIDE Month post.

* Dick Leitsch, Mattachine Society's newsletter July 1969. Cited here

Stonewall by the #s...

1 year later 1970-NYC's first official gay pride parade started at Stonewall and marched up 6th Avenue.

25 years later 1994 the National Education Association recognizes June as LGBT History Month.

30 years later 1999- 101 page nomination for Stonewall to be a National Monument.

47 years later 2016 Stonewall National Monument established

50 years later 2019 1st formal NYPD apology for the Stonewall raid and decades of anti-gay discrimination.

From the records: Excerpts from nomination for Stonewall to be an official monument: 5/27/1999, National Park Service, National Register of Historic Places and Landmarks, NARA ID 75319963

President Barack Obama, 6/24/2016: "I’m designating the Stonewall National Monument as the newest addition to America’s national parks system. Stonewall will be our first national monument to tell the story of the struggle for LGBT rights. I believe our national parks should reflect the full story of our country – the richness and diversity and uniquely American spirit that has always defined us. That we are stronger together. That out of many, we are one." -

More online:

LGBTQ+ Pride Month special topics page, National Archives News

Pride in Protesting: 50th of Stonewall Uprising, Pieces of History

The National Archives Records of Rights exhibit (in DC and online) includes RIGHTS TO PRIVACY AND SEXUALITY.

Stonewall@NARA, NARA's LGBTQ employee affinity group.

NARA's Amending America: LGBTQ Human and Civil Rights, Google Arts and Culture

youtube

Richard Blanco's keynote address, National Archives National Conversations on #RightsAndJustice: LGBTQ Human and Civil Rights.

"These People Are Frightened to Death": Congressional Investigations and the Lavender Scare, Prologue

Pride in Protesting: 50th of Stonewall Pieces of History

Before Stonewall: Facing Congress with Courage Pieces of History

DocsTeach: Primary Sources related to LGBTQ+

United States v. Edith Windsor 2013

Obergefell v. Hodges (Audio files: argument and opinion

#stonewall #lgbtq pride #lgbt rights #lgbt community #civil rights #stonewall riots #pride history #obergefell v. hodges #Youtube #pride month #freedom

137 notes · View notes

professorsta · 2 years

Text

Just want any queer elder to know it’s Not Normal for young queers to not know their history. I’ve been seeing a lot of posts with young queers knowing very little of our past and I- I just want to reassure that I’m 19 with 18-23 year old queer friends who deeply know and understand our history. We know that Sodomy laws caused men to be chemically castrated, we know that sometimes all it took was seeming queer for police to be busting down your door, we know about the lavender scare and we know that the reason our oldest members in the community hit 40-50 is because of Reagan. We know and we’re Sorry so many have forgotten, we’re sorry you fought with blood, sweat, and tears only to have those you fought for not even know a war had been going on in the first place. We Thank you for fighting for us and I promise to continue to fight for our community so your efforts are never in vain

#queer community #roe vs wade #lawrence v texas #griswold v. connecticut #obergefell v. hodges #lgbtq #lgbtq community #queer

139 notes · View notes

dontmean2bepoliticalbut · 2 years

Text

After debate citing indoctrination and Nazis, Miami-Dade School Board rejects LGBTQ month

After listening to more than three hours of angry debate, with one side likening the measure to student indoctrination and the other talking about how Nazis ostracized gays and lesbians with a pink triangle, the Miami-Dade School Board voted late Wednesday evening to slap down a measure recognizing October as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer History Month and teaching 12th graders about two landmark Supreme Court cases impacting the LGBTQ communities.

The vote was 8-1 with board member Lucia Baez Geller, who proffered the item, the only one voting for the measure.

The vote brought out droves of parents, teachers and students — along with a contingent of Proud Boys, who got in a loud argument with a person hoisting a trans flag outside the School Board headquarters at 1450 NE Second Ave. in downtown Miami. Throughout Wednesday, about 35 to 45 people stood in line in the afternoon sun outside the building, waiting to enter to make their comments known.

A person waving a transgender flag stands in front of a group of Proud Boys outside a contentious Miami-Dade School Board meeting discussing whether to recognize October as LGBTQ+ History Month in schools on Wednesday, Sept. 7, 2022, at the board’s headquarters in downtown Miami. Sommer Brugal [email protected]

“There is an election year and the anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric is a tool used by some to spread misinformation,” said board member Lucia Baez Geller. “This is just plain disinformation.”

Baez Geller’s proposal called for recognizing October as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) History Month and teaching 12th graders about two Supreme Court landmark decisions — Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015 (recognizing same-sex marriage) and Bostock v. Clayton County in 2020 (finding an employer can’t fire someone for being gay or transgender).

The school district recognizes many months throughout the school year to teach students about history, whether it be about Hispanic heritage, Black history or women’s history. October is National LGBT History Month.

A woman looks up at Maxx Fenning while he speaks in support of the Miami-Dade School Board designating October as LGBTQ+ History Month. Fenning, president and founder of PRISM FL, a nonprofit organization that provides sexual health information to LGBTQ+ youth, wore a pink triangle as he likened opposition to the measure to how Nazis ostracized gay people, making them wear a pink triangle badge to reflect their sexual orientation. Alie Skowronski [email protected]

Ahead of Wednesday’s meeting, Baez Geller said the measure “is mostly to recognize the dignity and the respect for each other.” On Wednesday, she noted that 12th graders could opt out of learning about the two Supreme Court cases.

Alex Serrano, director of the Miami-Dade chapter of County Citizens Defending Freedom, speaks against recognizing LGBTQ History Month in October in Miami-Dade Public Schools at the School Board meeting on Wednesday, Sept. 7, 2022. The group fought the School Board over a sex-education textbook that the board first banned, then reinstated in a second vote. Serrano has no children in Miami-Dade Public Schools. He sends his children to Centner Academy, a Miami private school with a controversial anti-COVID-19 vaccination agenda. Alie Skowronski [email protected]

Last year, the Board voted 7-1 to recognize October as (LGBTQ) month, but last year’s measure did not include the provision to add the two Supreme Court cases to the 12th grade coursework.

Around 9:45 p.m. Wednesday, nearly six hours after the discussion first began — with a nearly one-hour break to hear about the district’s $7 billion budget in between — the Board finally voted. Those still in the audience cheered and clapped while others sat stoically after the 8-1 vote defeating the measure.

Before the vote, many who spoke in favor of the adoption, including numerous human rights organizations, argued a recognition would create a safe and reaffirming environment for students in the district. Many cited discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community and how many students struggle with mental health issues.

Maxx Fenning, president and founder of PRISM FL, a nonprofit organization that provides sexual health information to LGBTQ+ youth, likened those who wanted to block the measure to how Nazis ostracized gay people, making them wear a pink badge to reflect their sexual orientation.

“LGBTQ history is American history,’’ he said, noting if he were alive when the Nazis were in power, he would have been forced to wear the pink triangle badge that he wore on his shirt as he spoke.

Another man, who was a product of Miami-Dade Public Schools, urged the board members to pass the measure, noting he did not want students to feel the isolation that he did when he was a gay student in school decades ago.

“I can tell you as a gay child, I felt completely alone,’’ he said.

Those who opposed the measure said it went against their religious beliefs and that the board was abiding in the indoctrination and sexual abuse of children. Some, however, falsely claimed that the measure would adopt new curriculum for students to learn about LGBTQ+ issues. They said it was a gateway to speaking with students about LGBTQ+ topics without parental consent.

Max Tover, a pastor and parent in the district, led those outside in a prayer, asking that the board members reject the motion. In speaking to the Herald, he said passing the measure is “a Trojan Horse.” His friend, who wouldn’t provide his name, said talking about the law equates to child abuse.

During the public comment period, parent after parent who opposed the measure used the term “indoctrination” when speaking against the measure, saying it was parents’ right to decide whether to teach their children about gay and lesbian rights, not teachers in public schools.

Baez Geller countered that the measure did not indoctrinate students nor did it take away parental choice, as many who opposed the measure cited the recently passed “Parental Rights in Education” law, which prohibits instruction related to gender identity or sexual orientation in kindergarten through third grade. Those opposed to the law say it could potentially restrict such instruction for older kids and have called it the “Don’t Say Gay” bill.

Baez Geller reiterated that parents could opt out of the 12th-grade lessons on the Supreme Court cases, but noted that students already learn about other Supreme Court cases that have become the law of the land, and these two cases are no different, she said.

Shortly before the vote, Andrea S. Pita Mendez, the board’s student adviser, spoke in favor of the item, despite feeling scared to share how she felt and what she believed in after listening to the multiple hours of public comment. Nevertheless, she said, she was elected by her peers to represent the student body, which she said supported the item.

Moreover, she said, she disagreed with board member Lubby Navarro’s comments claiming parents were the district’s clients. Instead, she argued, students were the district’s clients.