Supreme Court Hears Washington State Referendum 71 Case

One of the ironies of the activities of the Uber-Christians is that in addition to wearing their religion on their sleeves much like the ostentatious Pharisees condemned in the Bible, they also pat themselves on the back and claim to be "real Americans" and pretend to be the defenders of democracy. That is except for when democracy and political disclosure laws are inconvenient and might demonstrate to the world that they are actually nasty bigots who prefer to harm the civil rights of other citizens anonymously. The case that was just argued before the U.S. Supreme Court involving the Christianist effort to block the release of the names of those who signed petitions to place a potential repeal of same sex domestic partnership rights on the ballot shines a bright light on the hypocrisy of these self-congratulatory "Christians." Few things pose a bigger threat to democracy than ballot measures put in place by anonymous parties - conspirators if you will - with no transparency as to who and what money interests are behind the anti-liberty initiatives. The Advocate looks at this story and surprisingly, Antonin Scalia may not help out his fellow religious extremists. Here are some highlights:
*
Gay rights opponents arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court to keep secret the names of petitioners who opposed a Washington state domestic partnership law said on Wednesday that such disclosure would have a chilling effect on freedom of speech.
*
During oral arguments in Doe v. Reed — a lawsuit arising from Washington’s Referendum 71, in which voters ultimately approved an “everything but marriage” law for gay couples — Protect Marriage Washington attorney James Bopp. Jr. argued that “no person should suffer harassment” as a result of participating in the political process by signing a petition.
*
Several justices appeared skeptical of Bopp’s arguments, however. Justice Antonin Scalia, who has historically voted against protecting anonymous speech, was particularly aggressive in questioning Bopp, saying that, “Running a democracy takes a certain amount of civic courage.”
*
“The First Amendment does not protect you from criticism, or even nasty phone calls when you exercise your political rights to legislate,” Scalia said. Scalia told Bopp that he is asking the Court “to enter into a whole new field” by asking the justices to overturn Washington’s open records law.
*
"The people of Washington evidently think that this is not too much of an imposition upon people's courage, to stand up and sign something and be willing to stand behind it," Scalia said. Scalia further ridiculed Protect Marriage Washington's attempt to block disclosure of the signatures, calling the arguments "touchy-feely."
*
Washington attorney general Rob McKenna argued that public disclosure of petition signatures, is, like campaign contributions and voter rolls, vital to the state’s interest in protecting against fraud.
*
A majority of Washington voters approved the expanded domestic partnership rights for same-sex couples in November. Following the referendum, Protect Marriage Washington sued to block the release of the signatures it had collected, fearing that those in favor of stripping gays and lesbians of expanded domestic partnership rights would face harassment and retribution.
*
I can think of few things more un-American or more cowardly than wanting to attack the civil rights of other citizens and then hide behind anonymity rather than stand up publicly for their convictions. Indeed, the Protect Marriage Washington crowd come across as some what akin to Nazi informants who anonymously turned in Jews.