The U.S. Supreme Court is currently considering a case that could let taxpayer-funded adoption and foster care agencies around the country use their religious beliefs as a reason to discriminate against LGBTQ people and others. New research from the Movement Advancement Project (MAP) shows the widespread impact that could have on children in care.
Indiana continues to press the U.S. Supreme Court to take a case that would deny the right of married nonbiological mothers in same-sex couples to be recognized as legal parents by being put on their children’s birth certificates. It doubled down in a brief filed with the court last week. Double down with me as we take a look at the case—and how parenting bloggers are inadvertently playing an odd role.
Tired of election news? Here are some recent profiles of LGBTQ families, musings on the path forward for LGBTQ parental rights in the U.S., and news about LGBTQ families from around the world!
Even as we have been waiting for the results of the presidential election, the U.S. Supreme Court heard a case yesterday that will determine whether taxpayer-funded foster care and adoption agencies—and possibly any provider of government-contracted services—can cite religious beliefs as a reason to discriminate against LGBTQ people and others. Here are some of the arguments made.
We are a week away from the 2020 elections. President Trump’s nominee Amy Coney Barrett has just been seated on the U.S. Supreme Court. A case that the court will be hearing the day after the elections has me as concerned as the elections themselves, for it goes to the heart of how our country treats its children and to LGBTQ people’s right to be treated equally as prospective parents.
Her loss is a loss for our country—yet even as we mourn, we must recommit to the cause of justice that she championed.
More than 1,000 experts and organizations filed nearly 50 briefs with the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday arguing that taxpayer-funded child welfare agencies should not be able to discriminate against LGBTQ people and others by citing religious beliefs. The implications of this case could go far beyond child welfare, however.
The only time I’ve ever been on birth control was when my spouse and I were trying to have a child. This just goes to show the variety of ways that birth control is used—and why the Supreme Court’s recent decision allowing more employers to refuse to cover it is very much a queer issue.
The U.S. Supreme Court surprised many today with a landmark 6-3 ruling, written by Trump appointee Neil Gorsuch, stating that people cannot be fired from their jobs because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Yet last Friday, the Trump administration finalized a rule that says health care anti-discrimination protections don’t cover discrimination based on LGBTQ identities.
The Trump Administration last week filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court stating that taxpayer-funded child welfare agencies should be allowed to discriminate against LGBTQ people and others if serving them conflicts with the agency’s religious beliefs. The administration’s position should come as a surprise to exactly no one.
