Wednesday Writs: SCOTUS, Gorsuch, and The Amalgamation of Bostock

Avatar

Em Carpenter

Em was one of those argumentative children who was sarcastically encouraged to become a lawyer, so she did. She is a proud life-long West Virginian, and, paradoxically, a liberal. In addition to writing about society, politics and culture, she enjoys cooking, podcasts, reading, and pretending to be a runner. She will correct your grammar. You can find her on Twitter.

Related Post Roulette

22 Responses

  1. Avatar veronica d
    Ignored
    says:

    Notwithstanding my concern about the Court’s transgression of the Constitution’s separation of powers, it is appropriate to acknowledge the important victory achieved today by gay and lesbian Americans. Millions of gay and lesbian Americans have worked hard for many decades to achieve equal treatment in fact and in law.

    Perhaps it’s just me, but this statement seems to exclude a notable population who are also “victorious” in this suite, and who were represented by one of the three parties. It seems hard to believe he was unaware of this commission.

    What I mean is, in his attempt to appear gracious, he still couldn’t bring himself to congratulate trans people?

    What a knuckle dragging troglodyte.Report

    • Avatar Em Carpenter
      Ignored
      says:

      I noticed that, too. I meant to point that out, actually, so thank you for doing so.Report

    • Avatar DensityDuck
      Ignored
      says:

      can’t just take the W, huh?Report

      • Avatar veronica d
        Ignored
        says:

        I want full acceptance of trans people across all of society. Anything less isn’t enough.Report

        • Avatar Oscar Gordon
          Ignored
          says:

          That’s one of those things that will probably require the boomers to finally age out of the positions of power.Report

          • Avatar veronica d
            Ignored
            says:

            I certainly hope that’s all it takes.Report

          • Avatar Freeman
            Ignored
            says:

            My 80 year old parents reconsidered their religion-based objections when my grandchild came out. Close familiarity with the “other” has a way of dissipating bigotry. It was impossible for them to maintain their level of animosity toward the idea of trans people once someone they knew and loved announced their orientation. They don’t approve, but they accept, and that’s progress.

            So I have a lot of hope for the future. The kids these days are growing up with a lot more exposure to people of other races and lifestyles than previous generations did, and the ones I know do not countenance bigotry.Report

          • Avatar Mike Schilling
            Ignored
            says:

            What will it take to end ageism?Report

        • Avatar DensityDuck
          Ignored
          says:

          and ace, and aro, and intersex, and genderqueer, and and and and and and.

          it really says so much that you’ll look at fucking Brett Kavanaugh saying that this is an “…important victory achieved today by gay and lesbian Americans…[who] have worked hard for many decades to achieve equal treatment in fact and in law” and your response is to call him a knuckle-dragging troglodyte. Fuck outreach, I guess.Report

  2. Avatar Doctor Jay
    Ignored
    says:

    [WW1] Given that Alito and Thomas were quite willing to strike down all of Obamacare on the basis of , “nyah, nyah, you wrote it wrong”, I mean textualism, their sudden conversion to purposivism is, ahem, unconvincing.

    Nothing about Kavanaugh’s opinion changes my assessment of him as a bootlicking people-pleaser.

    I think that it’s fair to ask why the SCOTUS didn’t use Gorsuch’s reasoning on prior cases. If memory serves, the CA Supreme Court did exactly that in striking down Prop 8. Maybe the simple answer for Gorsuch is, “they didn’t have me”.Report

  3. Avatar DensityDuck
    Ignored
    says:

    “Gorsuch points out that Title VII protects individuals, not groups.”

    An interesting bit of reasoning that, I think, will come back to bite them later. Because this suggests that the discriminatory effect which Title VII makes illegal is necessarily an individual act between employer and employee — that while I might fire Joe because he’s black, that implies nothing about what I’d do to Frank who is also black, so Frank can’t file any claims under Title VII. (Or that my refusal to fire Bluto for blustering on social media about the Demon Homosexual doesn’t constitute a Title VII violation because Bluto wasn’t referring to anyone specific at the workplace, or indeed to the workplace at all.)Report

    • Avatar CJColucci
      Ignored
      says:

      Frank can’t file any claims now. Not because the treatment of Joe “implies nothing” about the treatment of Frank — it could imply a great deal — but because the employer hasn’t done anything to Frank. Once the employer does do something to Frank, how the employer treated Joe, as well as how he treated Sam and Fred, who are white, will be a matter of great importance. Nothing in Justice Gorsuch’s opinion changes that.Report

  4. Avatar Richard Hershberger
    Ignored
    says:

    I have seen the suggestion that Gorsuch might be a genuine textualist, willing to go wherever it takes him regardless of personal whims. If so, he is the first in the history of the Republic. But it is an interesting thought. We will have many years of rulings to judge whether or not he is a genuine unicorn.Report

  5. Avatar Mike Schilling
    Ignored
    says:

    Next, the employers revert to the argument that the drafters of Title VII had no intention of this result.

    I expect that few if any people involved with drafting the 14th thought it protected interracial marriage. Does that make Loving vs. Virginia invalid?Report

  6. Avatar Mike Schilling
    Ignored
    says:

    WW5: There’s also talk about Trump trying to stop his niece’s upcoming book because it violates her NDA. (What, you don’t make your family members sign NDAs?)Report

    • Avatar greginak
      Ignored
      says:

      His trying to stop bolton’s book might be one of the most epic adventures in paying for some lawyers second or third vacation houses ever.

      I’d also guess Niece Trump’s publishers and lawyers have already gamed out how the NDA thing will be the most epic publicity ever.Report

      • Avatar Mike Schilling
        Ignored
        says:

        The previous best example was Fox trying to stop Al Franken from being mean to Bill O’Reilly.

        The most direct result of the suit was a windfall for Franken and his publisher, Penguin Group (USA). The book had originally been slated for release on September 22, 2003, but the publicity resulting from the suit prompted Penguin to move the release date up to August 21 and print an extra 50,000 copiesReport

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *