Title VII and June

NCR has the CNS  curtain raiser in the upcoming Supreme Court term: Religious liberty, discrimination and DACA highlight court's new term

In June v. Gee, the Center for Reproductive Rights is representing June Reproductive Health Services in applying for Certiorari to overturn the 5th Circuit in upholding the Louisiana Trap Laws.

The Court can hear the case (possibly reopening Roe), deny Certiorari (leaving Trap in place and maybe overturning Roe by opening the door for state government  power) or reverse the Circuit and repeal the state law.

There are 3 questions at play in June v. Gee. Can the 5th Circuit decision stand as is? Are there new arguments on the issue? Does the Court want to hear them?

2 new Justices is not the answer. If you think it is, you do not understand the Court or law in general.

A per Curiam ruling reversing the 5th Citcuit signals the Circuit to pass on hearing any appeal to the inevitable overturn of the Alabama Abortion Law. For all intents and purposes, this will end the pro-life movement as a Republican entity. We will know October 7th. The only way forward for the movement would be massive subsidies for all families with children as part of tax reform. That takes joining the Democrats to pass.

On October 8th, the Court hears 3 cases on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act relating to sex discrimination and whether it can be decided judicially. This is not a case about marriage equality per se. The question before the Court is whether the spate of findings that have recognized gays and lesbians as a protected class allow the meaning of sex in the CRA to be expanded to sexuality without having to pass ENDA? It is an argument about how the Court rules, not the result. This is not a First Amendment question.

If the merits of Catholic HR policy were before the Court (that would be a District Court matter to be separately litigated), the question would be of fact. Specifically, does the Church allow employees to enter into heterosexual civil marriage and not homosexual marriage.

No. Bigotry cannot be sanctified in that way, nor can sour grapes over its argument in Perry v. Brown against marriage equality being laughed out of court.

The profound issue is how many retirements will it take until the Church starts blessing gay unions? While the number of global South cardinals is an indication, I must note that they are already bishops.

Amoris Laetitia was pastoral. So is blessing legal civil marriage, especially with a Pope with a doctoral degree in the sciences. He actually can make sense of the argument of disordered or created. Disordered is a sophistry - a relativistic way to avoid scientific reality.

Being gay is biology, not rebellion, and to not believe gay men when they assert otherwise is not only bad behavior, but it asks them to accept our lived experience of faith when we reject their lives experience of their sexuality.