Outraged leftists claim civil rights will be overturned after abortion. But Alito's leaked opinion disproves them.



Leftists and Democrats stoked fear after the leak of a Supreme Court draft opinion revealed the court will overturn Roe v. Wade. They claimed the forthcoming decision is a bellwether for the revocation of other rights.

What was claimed?

Politicians, journalists, and lawyers who are outraged over the decision claimed that LGBT rights, civil rights, and other rights are next.

  • Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.): "As we’ve warned, SCOTUS isn’t just coming for abortion — they’re coming for the right to privacy Roe rests on, which includes gay marriage + civil rights."
  • Nikole Hannah-Jones, author of the "1619 Project": "You can’t understand the court overturning Roe without understanding the role racism has played in the rise of the religious right and no reporter should report on this without talking about what may come next: Rulings against civil rights."
  • Bakari Sellers, a Democratic lawyer: "Gay rights. Brown v. Board (which nullified "separate but equal"). Loving (the case that banned laws against interracial marriage). S*** they coming for all us. Sleep tight."
  • Dan Canon, a law professor: "I just want to add to the chorus of voices saying that this won't stop at abortion. Marriage equality, birth control, affirmative action. Miranda rights, trans rights, separation of church and state, the whole-ass 4th Amendment, civil and criminal trials, these and more can all be taken away. They've told us they want to do it and they WILL ABSOLUTELY DO IT if there isn't significant and meaningful pushback."
  • Lauren Coats, a senior CNN legal analyst: "A familiar phrase is 'a slippery slope' in the Supreme Court. That which you do in one area could extend to others. Well, fundamental rights include interstate travel, include the idea of same-sex marriage, include same-sex relationships, just to name a few. Now this is essentially gone — what’s next?"
  • Athena Salman (D), an Arizona state lawmaker: "They’re coming after all of our fundamental human rights. Full stop."

But what is the truth?

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who authored the leaked opinion, specifically stated in the draft that a decision to overturn abortion precedents would not open the door to roll back other rights.

"[T]o ensure that our decision is not misunderstood or mischaracterized, we emphasize that our decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right. Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion," Alito wrote.

Chief Justice John Roberts has confirmed that the leaked draft is authentic.

Roberts vowed, "To the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the Court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed. The work of the Court will not be affected in any way."

The Stonewall Inn Is No Longer Serving Some Anheuser-Busch Products

Anheuser-Busch allegedly gave money to anti-LGBTQ lawmakers, an activist group claimed

Republican Support For Gay Marriage Surpasses 50% For First Time Ever, Poll Finds

GOP Supports LGBT?

Washington Supreme Court opens door to forcing religious organizations to hire LGBT individuals



The Washington state Supreme Court reversed a lower court's decision this week regarding legal exemptions for religious employers, in a move that could open the door to forcing religious organizations to hire LGBT employees.

In the original ruling passed down more than two years ago, King County Superior Court Judge Karen Donohue dismissed a bisexual attorney's complaint against Seattle's Union Gospel Mission after the attorney, Matt Woods, sued the mission for discrimination when it refused to hire him upon learning of his sexuality.

The mission, Donohue ruled at the time, was acting within its rights because as a religious nonprofit it was exempt from the state's anti-discrimination law regarding one's sexual orientation. But now the state Supreme Court has reversed that ruling and ordered that the case return to the lower court, the Seattle Times reported.

Seattle Times reporter Sydney Brownstone was careful to note that while the court's ruling doesn't altogether strike down the religious employer exemption it "questions whether that exemption applies to a staff attorney at a legal aid clinic." The decision, she noted, "could potentially open the door to more LGBTQ staffers working in social services at religious nonprofits."

And because many of the state's social service programs are run by religious organizations, the ruling could have serious ripple effects far beyond just homeless shelters.

In response to the new development, Woods said he was relieved.

"To get the affirmation from the court that religious organizations don't have a right to blanket discriminate against LGBTQ people for who they are no matter what the job is a big relief," he said. "Especially for members of my community that are so much more likely to experience discrimination in the workplace because of their race or gender identity."

The mission, one of Seattle's largest homeless shelter and service organizations, declined to comment when contacted by the Times.

The Times report adds that "local religious organizations have been undergoing a reckoning in recent years, as same-sex marriage has gained acceptance from the general public."

Though not directly related to the case in Washington state, the ruling certainly represents the kind of legal challenges that could arise for religious organizations should the Equality Act pass both chambers of Congress and be signed into law.

The legislation, which passed in the House last month, may soon threaten punishment against individuals and organizations who still hold to traditional beliefs about marriage, gender identity, and sexual orientation.

Kelly Loeffler’s Bill To Protect Female Athletes Is A Sign The GOP Finally Figured Out The Culture War

Kelly Loeffler’s Bill To Protect Female Athletes Is A Sign The GOP Finally Figured Out The Culture War

It's exactly the kind of culture war battle Republicans long avoided, terrified of inciting controversy with the media and cultural left.