House Takes A Step Towards Protecting Americans From A Rogue Supreme Court
This evening, the House passed a Democratic messaging, bill, Jerry Nadler’s H.R. 8404, the Respect for Marriage Act, with a nice healthy 267 to 157 majority. Even the most reactionary Democrats voted for it, as did 47 Republicans. And it wasn’t just the “mainstream” conservatives among the GOP who voted for it. Several fringe lunatics who normally-- and robotically-- vote with the Republican House leadership voted for it as well, like career-long California homophobes Ken Calvert, Jay Obernolte and Darrell Issa. And so did extremists like Scott Perry (PA), Brian Steel (WI) and Kat Cammack (FL). Needless to say, the Gang Greene stuck together, wedded to their bigotry and hatred.
In Nadler’s words, the bill “provides statutory authority for same-sex and interracial marriages. Specifically, the bill repeals and replaces provisions that define, for purposes of federal law, marriage as between a man and a woman and spouse as a person of the opposite sex with provisions that recognize any marriage that is valid under state law. (The Supreme Court held that the current provisions were unconstitutional in United States v. Windsor in 2013.) The bill also repeals and replaces provisions that do not require states to recognize same-sex marriages from other states with provisions that prohibit the denial of full faith and credit or any right or claim relating to out-of-state marriages on the basis of sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin. (The Supreme Court held that state laws barring same-sex marriages were unconstitutional in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015; the Court held that state laws barring interracial marriages were unconstitutional in Loving v. Virginia in 1967.) The bill allows the Department of Justice to bring a civil action and establishes a private right of action for violations.”
It was sad to see Republican closet cases Madison Cawthorn (NC), Patrick McHenry (NC), Matt Gaetz (FL) and the two Smiths (NE and MO) all vote no. So idiotic. It was also funny to see Kevin Calvert— whose redrawn district now includes Palm Springs, one of America’s gayest communities— switch from virulent homophobia to gay friendly. A few days ago L.A. Times reporter Seema Mehta noticed the convenient transformation. Calvert is best known as an out-of-control sexual predator and a crooked self-server and hypocrisy comes easy to him.
Mehta wrote that he “has held on to his seat in Congress for 30 years, in part by opposing gay rights. Now that he’s running for reelection against a gay rival in a district that includes one of the largest concentrations of LGBTQ voters in America, Calvert says his views have changed. Despite his previous opposition, the Republican says, he believes the 2015 Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex marriage across the nation should not be overturned. ‘It wasn’t always my position,’ Calvert said. ‘It’s a different country than it was 30 years ago.’ Whether it’s principle or opportunism, Calvert’s change of heart seems a necessary shift in a race that has grown far more competitive as a result of the redrawing of California’s congressional boundaries. Party registration in the new Riverside County district, which includes Palm Springs and surrounding communities, is about even; the district Calvert currently represents is solidly Republican. And his opponent for reelection? Democrat Will Rollins, a former federal prosecutor who worked on Jan. 6 insurrection cases and who campaigns with his partner, Paolo Benvenuto.”
The bar for being a sexual predator is now a cop accusing you of appearing to get a blowjob from a prostitute? That seem like a pretty low bar for a pretty serious charge. I was expecting a string of violated accusers, or maybe some underage victims, not a consensual if illegal alleged transaction.
accuracy in reporting for once: "This evening, the House passed a Democratic messaging, bill, Jerry Nadler’s H.R. 8404, the Respect for Marriage Act"
"messaging", absolutely.
because everyone in the hou$e knows that the nazis will filibuster it in the $enate on principle (see: that motherfucker ted cruz). And if it being an election year, they decide to let it go, it will probably be defeated by the democrap majority alone. And if the democraps ask the money and the money blesses marriage equality (sorta), which they've already done, and the democraps manage to pass it... the supreme court can overturn it just as easily as they've been overturning everything else.
so this amounts to "but a walking shadow, a poor…