ad_email
ad_email_468

One response to “Openly gay man nominated to fed appeals court”

  1. John

    A hearty congratulations to Edward DuMont. His background seems to assure he’s qualified to adjudicate cases involving government contract claims, intellectual property, Indian tribes, and complicated tax refund litigation. Of course this very limited and narrowly circumscribed legal specialization also assures that (aside from cutting checks to failed activist groups like Equality California) he will be doing nothing to preserve LGBT rights from the bench. In this case his being openly gay is utterly irrelevant. Why should anyone care? Obama needs to be making LGBT appointments where they matter, where they can make a different to the community, instead of making token appointments that effectively muzzle dissent. When it comes to being a ‘sword and shield’ to protect our rights, Edward DuMont is now, for all practical purposes, taken out of circulation.

    However he is young and this may be a good proving ground for better things to come. In that light his professional representation in support of a religious group that successfully petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for the right to use public school facilities to host a family values series is rather troubling. In Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches School District, the Lamb’s Chapel evangelical church sought to show a series of family lectures by James Dobson on school property after school hours. The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously overturned the lower court’s decision to deny the church’s access to state (tax-funded) property claiming such use was permissible use because the films were not “church related.’ How any lecture on family values by the infamous James Dobson could not be church related escapes me, but the law is never that simple and the traditional “Lemon Test” itself provides a First Amendment loophole big enough to drive a truck through. “Mr. Jefferson! Build up this wall!” Moreover, all legal professionals understand that an attorney’s first ethical duty is ‘zealous advocacy’ for his client and not his personal agenda. During our careers most attorneys employed by law firms are often called upon to defend issues they find repugnant.

    Two things seem sure: by appointing Edward DuMont to narrowly circumscribed legal specialization, Obama stuck a token feather in his own cap and, more importantly, he cleverly decommissioned DuMont from any possibility of an advocacy role protecting the rights of his Community. He is effectively a ‘token’ gay safely appointed to a job where most certainly his being gay can not be of any relevance to us. Thanks anyway.

Leave a Reply

Your support keeps us going. Thank you!

Your support keeps us going. Thank you!

A Closer Look

Why some think the dissent cries ‘wolf’ over Supreme Court marriage decision

The U.S. Supreme Court’s June 26 decision striking down state bans against same-sex marriage has been touted as “probably the strongest manifesto in favor of marriage” and pilloried as “a threat to American democracy.” The huff and puff will soon die down, and here’s a look at the legal bricks that will remain standing and why some might think the dissent is crying “wolf.”

» more


Breaking News

EEOC decision gives concrete remedies for federal employees facing bias

A U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission decision Thursday could provide important remedies to thousands of federal workers who might face sexual orientation discrimination and may increase pressure on Congress to advance the ENDA.

» more


“Justice that arrives like a thunderbolt”: On same-sex marriage “the fight is over”

June 26 has been solidified as the historic date for LGBT history in the United States. It is the day in 2003 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states could not enforce laws prohibiting same-sex adults from having intimate relations. It is the day in 2013 when a Supreme Court procedural ruling enabled same-sex couples to marry […]

» more


Supreme Court: States must license and recognize licenses of marriages for same-sex couples

In a widely expected yet stunning victory for LGBT people nationally, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today (June 26) that state bans on marriage for same-sex couples are unconstitutional. The decision requires states to both issue marriage licenses to couples and to recognize marriage licenses obtained in other states by same-sex couples.

» more


Supreme Court upholds health insurance subsidies critical to people with HIV

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6 to 3 decision, upheld the right of the federal government to provide health care insurance subsidies to people with low income in states that have chosen not to participate in the Affordable Care Act by setting up insurance “exchanges.”

The decision, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, is a big political victory for the Obama administration and a big relief for people with low incomes, including many people with HIV.

» more


Abercrombie case: LGBT and evangelicals on the same side

It is a rare occasion when LGBT legal activists find themselves on the same side of a case as the conservative Christian Legal Society and the National Association of Evangelicals. It is also rare to find LGBT legal activists on the same side as conservative Justice Antonin Scalia and his fondness for hewing to the original explicit language of a law.

But so it was with EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch June 1, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an employer cannot escape federal law’s requirement to accommodate a job applicant’s religious practices by claiming the applicant never told the employer about his or her religious practices.

» more