Trump DOJ Seeks to Argue In Favor of Anti-Gay Discrimination

The Justice Department under Attorney General Jeff Sessions is seeking
time to argue before the Supreme Court on behalf of an anti-gay baker.
(Photo by Gage Skidmore; courtesy Wikimedia Commons)

As noted in numerous past blog posts, Donald Trump, a/k/a Der Trumpenführer, made a pact with Christofascist leaders in June of 2016, whereby he promised to wage war against the rights of LGBT citizens.  While Trump has delivered on few of his campaign promises, he is delivering on his promises to the Christofascists.  The latest proof is the effort by the Trump Department of Justice to intervene and file a brief in a case now before the U.S. Supreme that seeks to exempt Christofascists from complying with anti-discrimination and public accommodation laws.  What those who are unfamiliar with Der Trumpenführer's anti-LGBT agenda may not understand is that the special rights that Christofascists seek are so expansive that it could be Muslims, Hindus, women using contraception, or unwed co-habitating couples who find themselves as the next targets of Christofascist discrimination. The Washington Blade looks at this unprecedented effort to support discrimination albeit under the smoke screen of "religious freedom.:  Here are excerpts:

The U.S. Justice Department under U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions is seeking a time slot of 10 minutes before the U.S. Supreme Court to argue on behalf of a Colorado baker who wishes to refuse the sale of make wedding cakes for same-sex couples.

U.S. Solicitor General Noel Francisco filed the two-page request Wednesday before the Supreme Court in the case of Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission.

The request says the Justice Department “has a substantial interest” in the case because the U.S. government has an interest in “the preservation of federal constitutional rights of free expression.”

The request also argues the U.S. government has an interest in the case because the scope of Colorado non-discrimination law, which bars anti-gay discrimination in public accommodations, is similar to Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

As noted in the request, the Justice Department has already filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case arguing that baking a wedding cake is inherently an act of expression protected under the First Amendment. Therefore, the ability of a baker to deny a wedding cake to same-sex couples for religious reasons should trump any state non-discrimination law.

The case came about after Phillips refused to make a wedding cake for Charlie Craig and David Mullins, a Colorado same-sex couple, in 2012 for their wedding in Massachusetts. An administrative judge ruled in favor of the same-sex couple — a decision the Colorado Court of Appeals upheld in 2015.

Although the Colorado Supreme Court had declined to review these decisions and let them stand, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari, or agreed to take up the case, in June.  Oral arguments are set for Dec. 5.

Hmm . . .  do you think Sessions would file a brief in support of me if I refused to prepare legal documents for Christofascists since I view them akin to the Pharisees condemned by Christ in the New Testament?  I suspect not because Sessions believes only Christofascists have rights of religious freedom.  The rest of us do not in the age of Trump.