ad_email
ad_facebook_468

6 responses to “Showdown brewing over Tennessee anti-gay law”

  1. Frank

    This seems to be exactly the same law passed by voters in Colorado in 1992, called Amendment 2. The Supreme Court of the U.S. struck down Amendment 2. It is unconstitutional to single out one group and force them to jump higher hurdles than everyone else in their efforts to seek equality. I hope someone (city of Nashville) is ready to take this to court immediately, and shame the legislature and governor of Tennessee for their shameful discrimination.

  2. billy Wingarden

    When you hit these religious bigots in their pocketbooks, their hearts and minds will follow.

    Tenn – still fighting the civil war, only with a new victim. group

  3. rob S

    Can anyone give a non-laughable definition of “natural reproduction science”?

    More of the vile hate and bigotry from the wave of rightwing nutjobs. The kids parents kick him out, that is truly despicable, sign of religion at work.

  4. End Discrimination

    If the intent was to make a uniform law across all of TN, as the backers of HB600 have claimed, then why not pass a state law protecting LGBT employees? Wouldn’t that have the same outcome (a uniform law across TN)? Why legislate discrimination?

    While HB600 is targeted at the GLBT community, other groups WILL be affected too.

    Swift action to overturn this form of discrimination can reverse some of the affects of the damage done in TN. However, I fear that the elected officials and those who voted for them won’t move fast enough or loud enough. Maybe the businesses of TN will realize the damage HB600 will do to them and the reputation of TN and act quickly and reverse HB600 and send a powerful message that discrimination is not acceptable and that a small group of right wing politicians and business “leaders” will not hold the great volunteer state hostage and tarnish a welcoming reputation and business climate.

    Good luck to Abby Rubenfield, who will be taking HB600 to court.

  5. Harvard Law and Policy Review » Tenn. Smacks Down Local Anti-discrimination Laws

    […] Legislature pass state-wide anti-discrimination laws?” Otherwise, it appears to be what many opponents have label it: an anti-gay […]

  6. Ed Willey

    How many businesses were going under because of the “costs” of compliance? None. Protecting the poor businesses? Please! This is a license to discriminate and a total sham. The fact that they are trying to pass off this junk as economics is just laughable and insulting. If we followed their logic, we would throw out compliance with all sorts of local laws. I’m talking about construction codes, permits, taxes, etc. In fact, of all the local laws one could attack, I’m confident that a non-discrimination ordinance in a few cities is LESS costly on average than most local ordinances.

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

“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


Roberts’ questions stole the spotlight; will they steal the show on marriage?

Most legal observers who watched or listened to the oral arguments from April 28 in Obergefell v. Hodges, an appeal seeking to strike down bans on same-sex marriages in four states, focused on the likelihood that Justice Anthony Kennedy will vote with the court’s four liberal wing justices and find the bans unconstitutional. But a few, like University of California School of Law Professor Erwin Chemerinsky, believe the vote could even be 6 to 3, with Chief Justice John Roberts on board.

» more