Pete Buttigieg delivered a powerful response to Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett’s opening statement ahead of her U.S. Senate confirmation hearings.
Barrett, a social conservative with a history of anti-LGBTQ statements, was nominated by Donald Trump to fill Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat.
LGBTQ advocates have warned that she will attempt to “dismantle” LGBTQ rights and Democrats have described Republican attempts to jam through her nomination before the election as “shameful.”
Ahead of the confirmation hearings, which began today, Oct. 12, Barrett issued the transcript of her opening statement to the Senate, and said that courts “have a vital responsibility to enforce the rule of law.”
“Courts are not designed to solve every problem or right every wrong in our public life,” she added. “The policy decisions and value judgments of government must be made by the political branches elected by and accountable to the People. The public should not expect courts to do so, and courts should not try.”
Barrett’s words echo those of Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, who recently argued that the Supreme Court had bypassed the democratic process in its 2015 decision legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide.
Her opening statement transcript was released while Buttigieg, the openly gay former mayor of South Bend, Ind., and former Democratic presidential candidate, was giving an interview on MSNBC’s AM Joy.
Buttigieg was speaking about National Coming Out Day, but was asked to give his opinion on Barrett’s statement, Out reports.
“This is what nominees do,” Buttigieg said. “They write the most seemingly unobjectionable, dry stuff. But really what I see in there is a pathway to judicial activism cloaked in judicial humility.”
He continued: “At the end of the day, rights in this country have been expanded because courts have understood what the true meaning of the letter of the law and the spirit of the constitution is. That is not about time-traveling yourself back to the 18th century and subjecting yourself to the same prejudices and limitations as the people who write these words.
“The constitution is a living document because the English language is a living language. And you need to have some readiness to understand that in order to serve on the court in a way that will actually make life better,” Buttigieg said.
“It was actually Thomas Jefferson himself who said that ‘We might as well ask a man to still wear the coat which fitted him when he was a boy as expect future generations to live under’ — what he called — ‘the regime of their barbarous ancestors,'” Buttigieg added.
“So even the founders that these kind of dead hand originalists claim fidelity to understood better than their ideological descendants — today’s judicial so-called conservatives — the importance of keeping with the times. And we deserve judges and justices who understand that.”
Grindr will host its first-ever party tied to the White House Correspondents' Dinner, the annual Washington gathering celebrating the First Amendment and the media.
Hosted by the White House Correspondents' Association, the dinner raises money for journalism scholarships while bringing together media figures, politicians, business leaders, and celebrities for a night of networking and entertainment.
Historically, the event -- often dubbed the "Nerd Prom" -- features a stand-up comedian roasting political and media figures, along with a comedic speech, either live or videotaped, by the sitting president.
The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear a case brought by parents who say their child’s school district failed to notify them of the student’s social transition, including the use of a new name and different pronouns during school hours.
The high court offered no explanation for declining the appeal, leaving in place a 2-1 ruling from a three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that sided with the school district.
The case stems from a dispute involving January and Jeffrey Littlejohn, whose middle-school-aged child, assigned female at birth, told her parents in 2020 that she was questioning her gender and asked to go by "J" and use they/them pronouns. The parents did not agree but told their child, referred to as "A.G." in court documents, that she could use "J" as a nickname at school.
The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear a case over whether public schools violate parents’ rights by affirming a student’s gender identity without notifying them.
The case, Foote v. Ludlow School Committee, involves parents Stephen Foote and Marissa Silvestri, whose middle school-aged child -- identified in court documents as B.F. -- began questioning their gender identity and seeing a therapist.
The parents claimed in court filings that staff at Baird Middle School were “pushing beliefs concerning gender ideology behind the parents’ backs” and encouraging students to question their identities, contributing to their child’s confusion.
These are challenging times for news organizations. And yet it’s crucial we stay active and provide vital resources and information to both our local readers and the world. So won’t you please take a moment and consider supporting Metro Weekly with a membership? For as little as $5 a month, you can help ensure Metro Weekly magazine and MetroWeekly.com remain free, viable resources as we provide the best, most diverse, culturally-resonant LGBTQ coverage in both the D.C. region and around the world. Memberships come with exclusive perks and discounts, your own personal digital delivery of each week’s magazine (and an archive), access to our Member's Lounge when it launches this fall, and exclusive members-only items like Metro Weekly Membership Mugs and Tote Bags! Check out all our membership levels here and please join us today!
You must be logged in to post a comment.