U.S. Supreme Court: Last News

U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling legalizing marriage equality.The pugilistic former clerk of Rowan County has officially appealed an April ruling by U.S.

refused to recognize as an official campus organization.In the surprise move, the Orthodox Jewish educational institution said that it would end litigation related to its refusal to recognize the group, which it initially claimed was due to religious objections.As part of the settlement, the club — formerly known as the Yeshiva University Pride Alliance — would be renamed “Hareni” and would be allowed to operate with the same rights and privileges guaranteed to other student groups. Hareni will be allowed to publicly use the term “LGBTQ+” in communications and promotional materials, access university resources, and hold events on campus, such as charitable projects, movie and discussion nights, panel discussions, and networking events.

writing, “Make gay marriage illegal again. This is not remotely controversial, nor extreme.”Make gay marriage illegal again.This is not remotely controversial, nor extreme.— Rep.

The Howard Stern Show to speak about her presidential campaign and pitch herself to the radio host’s massive audience. She opened up about various topics, including the risk that a future Trump administration would pose to same-sex couples.During last Tuesday’s hour-long interview, Stern, a supporter of LGBTQ rights, mentioned how Senate Republicans had refused to consider any nominees for the U.S.

Lawrence v. Texas invalidated state-level sodomy laws as unconstitutional.However, unless a state proactively removes prohibitions on same-sex intimacy, local law enforcement authorities could choose to selectively enforce the law with the intent of targeting LGBTQ people — forcing them to expend money and energy defending themselves in court, even if the charges would ultimately be dismissed.Additionally, if the Supreme Court were to reverse its finding in the Lawrence case, those 12 states where anti-sodomy statutes have not been repealed would immediately be revived and could be used to prosecute LGBTQ people.Under Massachusetts’ anti-sodomy statute, which equates same-sex activity with bestiality, a person could be imprisoned for 20 years in prison for violating the law.A similar law punishes those convicted of an “unnatural and lascivious act” with a five-year prison sentence and a fine of up to $1,000.The anti-sodomy and “unnatural acts” laws are being targeted for repeal by some more liberal members of the state legislature, who are seeking to repeal or erase other outdated laws governing personal conduct, typically known as “morality” laws.One such law is a prohibition on “night walking,” which critics say can be used to harass individuals, especially transgender and gender-nonconforming individuals, for simply being out in public, allowing law enforcement to claim that such people intend to engage in prostitution.However, despite arguments from opponents, repealing the “night walking” law would not change other commonwealth laws declaring prostitution illegal.The Senate also added an amendment repealing a ban on “blasphemy,” a rarely-enforced statute in which Massachusetts residents are supposed to be punished

previous ruling by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in favor of the student, who is identified in court documents as A.C., will be allowed to remain in place while the case works its way through the courts.The 7th Circuit’s decision, issued in August, upheld a preliminary injunction issued by U.S.

ruled in favor of the state, finding that Tingley’s free speech rights were not violated.But on December 11, three justices — Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh — said they would have heard Tingley’s appeal. “There is a fierce public debate over how best to help minors with gender dysphoria,” Thomas wrote in his dissent.

signed into law in 2021.However, Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented, saying they would have granted Morrisey’s request.A federal judge previously blocked the law from taking effect while a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the ban proceeds.The plaintiff in the case, 12-year-old Becky Pepper-Jackson, is a transgender girl who tried to join her middle school girls’ cross-country team, but was informed that she would be barred from the team due to the law prohibiting transgender athletes from competing in female-designated sports.Pepper-Jackson sued state officials, her local school board, the West Virginia Board of Education, and the West Virginia Secondary School Activities Commission, arguing that the law is unconstitutional and discriminatory.In July 2021, U.S. District Court Judge Joseph Goodwin, of the Southern District of West Virginia, issued an injunction blocking the law from taking effect on the grounds that Pepper-Jackson was likely to prevail in her claim that the law is discriminatory.Six months later, Goodwin rejected Pepper-Jackson’s claim that the law violates Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex-based discrimination, finding the ban constitutional and asserting that the state had a legitimate interest in ensuring cisgender female athletes are not disadvantaged by having to compete against athletes assigned male at birth.

fined $135,000 by the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries following a 2013 incident in which the Kleins refused to bake a wedding cake for Laurel and Rachel Bowman-Cryer, a lesbian couple of 10 years.When Aaron Klein found out that the custom-made cake was intended for a lesbian wedding, he allegedly said, “We don’t do same-sex weddings” and called the couple an “abomination,” citing the Bible as justification.The Kleins have repeatedly claimed their religious beliefs opposing homosexuality prevent them from providing goods or services for a same-sex wedding.The Bowman-Cryers filed discrimination complaints with the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries and the Department of Justice.In response, the Kleins attempted to defend their refusal to bake the cake, “doxxing” the Bowman-Cryers in the process by sharing private information about them, including their address.The Bowman-Cryers were inundated with so many hateful messages and death threats that their two foster children had to be removed from the home for their own protection.The Bureau of Labor and Industries found that the Kleins had violated the Oregon Public Accommodations Law and ordered them to pay financial restitution to the Bowman-Cryers.The Kleins appealed the decision, which the Oregon Court of Appeals upheld. The Kleins then appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case, before appealing to the U.S.

2020 study from the Williams Institute, an LGBTQ think tank at the UCLA School of Law, found that lesbians, gays, and bisexuals subjected to conversion therapy are twice as likely to attempt suicide as those who never underwent it. A similar peer-reviewed study, published in the American Journal of Public Health, found that LGBTQ youth subjected to conversion therapy were more than twice as likely to report having attempted suicide and more than two-and-a-half times as likely to report multiple suicide attempts over the past year.But the South Florida bans were soon challenged by two marriage and family therapists in Palm Beach County, who claimed that the bans on conversion therapy discriminated against the therapists’ right to engage in and provide counseling consistent with their clients’ religious beliefs, and their clients’ right to seek treatment to deal with “unwanted same-sex attraction” or gender dysphoria, based on their religious beliefs opposing homosexuality.A federal judge initially ruled against the therapists, but on appeal, a three-judge panel of the 11th U.S.

Lady Gaga kicked off the U.S. leg of her Chromatica Ball tour with a message for the United States Supreme Court. “They better not try to mess with gay marriage in this country!” she said to loud applause from the crowd during a concert at Nationals Park in Washington, D.C.

State of the Union program on Sunday, Graham participated in a debate with Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut over the effects of a Democratic tax, spending, and climate bill that ultimately passed on a party-line vote.At one point, the topic turned to whether the U.S.

A gay Connecticut Supreme Court Justice has called Clarence Thomas’ recent statements advocating for the reversal of federally-recognized same-sex marriage rights “hypocritical” due to the justice’s failure to not call for the repeal of a similar ruling allowing interracial marriage.Andrew McDonald, a senior associate justice for Connecticut’s high court, blasted Thomas for suggesting — in a concurring opinion as part of a recent abortion-rights case —  that the nation’s highest court should re-examine all cases dealing with “substantive due process” rights, referring to rights that have been conferred or recognized by courts, but are not specifically mentioned in the Constitution.Among the “substantive due process” cases that Thomas said should be reconsidered by the court include the court’s 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut ruling, which allowed married couples to buy and use contraception without government interference, the 2003 Lawrence v.

brief, which casts Smith’s refusal to serve same-sex couples as a matter of religious freedom and artistic expression protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.Smith, the owner of the firm 303 Creative LLC, claims that she should be allowed to refuse to create websites for same-sex couples on the basis of her personal religious beliefs opposing homosexuality, and her refusal to communicate a message that implicitly supports same-sex marriage.Enlisting the help of the anti-LGBTQ legal group Alliance Defending Freedom, Smith sued the state of Colorado in 2016, demanding an exemption from the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, which prohibits businesses that open themselves up as places of public accommodation from discriminating against people based on sexual orientation.Smith claims she will do some work for LGBTQ clients, but creating wedding websites for those individuals would not only violate her religious beliefs but would violate her freedom of artistic expression, as each website she creates is a specially-tailored, one-of-a-kind product reflecting her own creativity.A federal district judge ruled against Smith in September 2019, finding that her proposal to post a statement outlining her objection to promoting same-sex weddings “proposes an unlawful act” because it would deny services to same-sex couples on the basis of their sexual orientation.

Phyllis Lyons, left, and Del Martin were the grand marshals of San Francisco’s Gay Freedom Day Parade on June 25, 1989, the 20th anniversary of the Stonewall riots. They are founders of the pioneering lesbian organization the Daughters of Bilitis. Photo by Tom Levy / San Francisco Chronicle / Polaris