New Poll: How Do Americans View The Supreme Court?

 

 

Public Policy Polling has completed a national poll on how Americans view the Supreme Court of the United States. Interestingly, 36% of Americans believe it is too liberal despite the fact that conservatives control five of the nine seats.

Who is the most popular Justice? That honor belongs to Justice Anthony Kennedy who is closely followed by Justice Sonia Sotomayor who is also the best known Justice!

Here is the polling firms report:

-Americans overall have a negative opinion of the Supreme Court- 42% see it unfavorably, with just 33% holding a positive opinion. Democrats have a narrowly positive opinion of it (39/37) while both Republicans (29/44) and independents (31/46) have pretty unfavorable views.

-Only 29% of Americans think the Supreme Court is ideologically 'about right' with 36% believing it's too liberal and 30% that it's too conservative. Voters in both parties think the Court is stacked to the other side- 59% of Republicans think the Court is too liberal to 26% who think it's about right, and 49% of Democrats think it's too conservative to 33% who think it's about right.

-There's a wide range in how well known the various members of the Supreme Court are to the public. Sonia Sotomayor is the best known with 74% name recognition, followed by Clarence Thomas at 68%, Ruth Bader Ginsburg at 64%, Antonin Scalia at 58%, Elena Kagan at 55%, John Roberts at 48%, Samuel Alito at 47%, Anthony Kennedy at 41%, and Stephen Breyer at 35%.

-Even though he's one of the least well known justices, Kennedy has the best net favorability of them all at +9 (25/16). That's because he's the only one who's seen positively by both Democrats (29/16) and Republicans (21/14).

The next most popular after Kennedy is Sotomayor at +8 (41/33). Others in positive territory are Ginsburg at +6 (35/29), Breyer at +3 (19/16), and Kagan at +1 (28/27).

-The more conservative members of the Court tend to also be the ones less popular with the public. Chief Justice John Roberts has the worst net favorability rating at -8 (20/28) largely because Republicans only narrowly like him following the Obamacare decision (22/21) while Democrats still have a pretty negative opinion of him (16/36). Samuel Alito (23/24), Antonin Scalia (27/31), and Clarence Thomas (31/37) all have negative marks as well, in each case because Democrats dislike them to a greater extent than Republicans see them in a positive light.

-Sotomayor's favorability with Hispanics is 62/19, while Thomas' with African Americans is 22/52.

Gregory Craig: Supreme Court Could Sink To Lowest Level In 150 Years Around Voting Rights Act

 

 

Gregory B. Craig, a Washington lawyer, was White House counsel from January 2009 to January 2010. Greg is a dear friend and a long time straight ally of the LGBT community. In addition he was one of President Clinton's lawyers doing the impeachment proceedings.

On Aug. 6, 1965, I was working in Coahoma County, Miss., trying to register new voters at the courthouse in Clarksdale. For many weeks, I and other civil rights workers in our project had been knocking on doors, persuading African Americans to go down to the courthouse, stand in line, risk retaliation, take a detailed written test and, inevitably, be rejected as unqualified. We would then ask each rejected applicant to sign an affidavit. We collected those affidavits and sent them in bundles to the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department. The purpose of this effort was to show that African Americans in the South wanted to vote and that this particular person had been prevented from registering for no reason other than his or her race. That summer, we persuaded 500 African American citizens in Coahoma County to try to register to vote. Four or five passed the test. The rest signed affidavits. We prayed that federal officials would read the affidavits and do something about the situation.

The summer of 1965 was hot and tense, but it was not as violent as the previous summer, when three workers were murdered in Neshoba County and when the chief of police in Clarksdale, Ben Collins, reportedly shot a black boy in the head in a public playground. Nonetheless, I lived in fear. I was afraid that I would get a flat tire after dark and that the police would pull me over, charge me with breaking the speed limit and take me to lock-up or that, out on the dusty streets of these small Delta towns, I might meet a crowd of angry white guys with nothing better to do than to beat the crap out of a civil rights worker.

Recently, we had been knocking on doors in Friars Point, a tiny town in the middle of a cotton field next to the levee. We were organizing a mass meeting at the Friars Point church where, we hoped, folks would come to find out how and where to register. We also hoped that the singing, the music, the speeches and the spirit would give us new energy for another week of work.

Just before we left Clarksdale to drive out to Friars Point the night of Aug. 6, we learned that President Lyndon Johnson had signed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and that the U.S. government would be sending federal registrars to Mississippi. At the church, we made the announcement to the people who had come to our meeting. Real change was on the way, we told them. I recall using the phrase, “There is a new world coming.” People sang and spoke. An older man got up and said that he was a school bus driver, that he had been wounded while serving in the Army during the war and that he still carried shrapnel in his body. He had never been allowed to vote, he said, and had not had the courage even to try. He said he would have his bus in front of the church the following Tuesday morning to carry anyone who needed a ride down to the courthouse.

That was a moment of real hope and change.

Many months later, I asked one of my Harvard professors — a distinguished legal historian who was also the biographer of Oliver Wendell Holmes — whether there was any concern about the constitutionality of Congress passing a law that imposed requirements on some states when it did not impose the same requirements on other states. He said: “No. We fought a very bloody war about that same question: the proper role of the federal government when it came to protecting the rights of an American citizen. The South lost that war; and in 1870 the country, to make itself absolutely clear on that issue, adopted the 15th Amendment. That amendment put the issue to rest.”

I looked up the amendment, which has two parts. The first part says: “(1) The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” The second part says: “(2) The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.” This amendment specifically empowers the most political branch of our national government to act to protect every American’s right to vote whenever and wherever Congress deems that right to be in jeopardy. It is hard to conceive of a legal or constitutional basis to justify the Supreme Court acting now to disable such a clear-cut grant of power. Description: Description: http://articles.washingtonpost.com/images/pixel.gif

The 15th Amendment has been on the books for 143 years. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 has been with us for almost 50 years. Over those years, the Supreme Court has reviewed the act and declared it constitutional on more than one occasion. In 2006, Congress held hearings, took evidence and re authorized the act — almost unanimously. If any American has complaints or criticisms about the way the law is drafted or implemented, that person — like all American citizens — has the right to petition Congress and ask that the law be changed. But the law is not unconstitutional.

For this Supreme Court to find the Voting Rights Act of 1965 unconstitutional would be to forget the Civil War and ignore the 15th Amendment. It would be the greatest example of judicial activism in generations. Such an opinion would bring the Supreme Court to its lowest point in 150 years.

Most experts think it is going to happen.

New National Poll Shows Huge Majority Believe Marriage Equality Is Constitutional Issue

 

 

 

The latest Quinnipiac Poll shows that a vast majority of Americans believe that marriage equality should be based on the Constitution of the United States and not individual states laws. A Supreme Court decision on marriage equality based on the Constitution would likely have considerable support nationally.

The poll numbers are powerful with 56% saying the issue should be decided by the American Constitution versus only 36% who believe it should be decided by state law.

The poll contained other interesting numbers.

Support for marriage equality has hit 50% for the first time in this poll. Just five years ago only 36% supported marriage equality. Now it has reached 50% and only 41% are opposed!

Also 65% of the American people say they now have a close friend who is gay or lesbian. Only 57% of those over 55 years old say they have one but a huge 71% of those under 35 years old say they know a close friend who is gay or lesbian.

The data from the poll shows once again the urgency of coming out of the closet. It is still today the most revolutionary action that can be taken by an LGBT American

Will Open Lesbian Mary Bonauto Someday Sit On The Supreme Court?

 

 

If there is a "Godmother' of the DOMA case before the United States Supreme Court it would have to be New England's Mary Bonauto. The legal genius who lives in Portland, Maine, made this her case from day one. She is the type of person we could find sitting on the Supreme Court of the United States someday.

The New York Times recently profiled this amazing woman and here are some excerpts:

“No gay person in this country would be married without Mary Bonauto,” said Roberta Kaplan, who went before the justices on Wednesday to argue one of the cases.

As the top civil rights lawyer for Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, or GLAD, based in Boston, Ms. Bonauto has spent more than a decade plotting a careful strategy to advance gay marriage rights. She prompted Vermont to create civil unions in 2000, won the 2003 case that made Massachusetts the first state to legalize same-sex marriage and last year persuaded a federal appeals court that the Defense of Marriage Act, which denies federal benefits to gay couples, is unconstitutional.

Yet in a quirk of fate, Ms. Bonauto watched her life’s work this week from the court’s spectator seats.

The justices considered a Defense of Marriage Act case on Wednesday, but it was not Ms. Bonauto’s, which she argued and won before the federal appeals court in Boston but which Justice Elena Kagan has acknowledged discussing when she was President Obama’s solicitor general. Instead the court took up a similar case, Ms. Kaplan’s from New York, presumably so Justice Kagan would not have to recuse herself.

“Am I disappointed?” Ms. Bonauto asked last week in her home here. “There is an element of disappointment, but I’m also incredibly excited. I feel like after all these years, you’re getting a hearing — a fair hearing — from the highest court in the land.”

At 51, Ms. Bonauto is serious and unassuming. “She is not going to set a room on fire,” said Dean Hara, a plaintiff in Ms. Bonauto’s Defense of Marriage Act case. “But when she is arguing, she is really somebody to listen to.”

Even her opponents offer kind words, saying they appreciate her civil tone.

“She has always been the consummate professional, very courteous and gentle,” said Kris Mineau of the Massachusetts Family Institute, even as he said her courtroom victories had “degraded the value of marriage.”

Ms. Bonauto works mostly from her home in this seaport city, where she and her wife, Professor Jennifer Wriggins of the University of Maine’s law school, are raising their 11-year-old twin daughters. Last year, the couple made the list of “The Most Powerful Lesbian Moms in America,” published by the Web site mombian.com. But Ms. Bonauto is too busy juggling legal briefs, homework and piano lessons to see herself as a woman making history.

“That’s not how we experience our lives,” she said.

Ms. Bonauto would be the first to say she builds on the work of others. As early as the 1970s, gay couples began suing for the right to marry, inspired by the 1967 Supreme Court ruling in Loving v. Virginia, which struck down state laws banning interracial marriage. In 1983, a young Harvard law student named Evan Wolfson wrote his third-year thesis on why gays should be free to marry.

Mr. Wolfson was eventually hired by Lambda Legal, the gay advocacy group, where he joined what he called “a very small little network of people who at that time were dedicated to toppling the so-called sodomy laws” that criminalized homosexual sex. Among them was Ms. Bonauto.

The daughter of a pharmacist and a preschool teacher from Newburgh, N.Y., she had come out, with some difficulty, while an undergraduate at Hamilton College. There, Ms. Bonauto was harassed over her sexual orientation, which she said contributed to her desire to “make life better” for others.

By 1990, with a law degree from Northeastern University, she was working for GLAD in Boston. She had been there less than a week when a gay couple approached her with the idea of suing to get married. She said no, the timing was not right.

“I would have cases of somebody who goes to a Dunkin’ Donuts and the wait person realizes it was a gay person and goes nuts,” Ms. Bonauto recalled. How could she pursue a seeming luxury like marriage, she reasoned, when gay people were being discriminated against in housing, employment and adoption and being harassed by the police?

*****************************************

Once she had established a right to marriage, Ms. Bonauto went after the Defense of Marriage Act, which denied legally married gay couples the federal benefits that straight couples could have. Barney Frank, the former Massachusetts congressman, who is openly gay, said the move had sealed Ms. Bonauto’s reputation as a “first-rate lawyer and a first-rate strategist” who built on one victory after another.

“She’s our Thurgood Marshall,” he said, referring to the Supreme Court justice who made history fighting racial discrimination.

Ms. Bonauto was at first skeptical of the other gay marriage case before the court, the challenge to Proposition 8, California’s ban on same-sex marriage. She feared the court was not ready to grant gay couples a broad constitutional right to marry. But public opinion has shifted so drastically since the case was filed in 2009, Ms. Bonauto said last week, she now believes the justices can find a way to “issue a marriage decision that the country would embrace.” She has witnessed that shift at home; last year, Maine became the first state where voters approved same-sex marriage, reversing a decision from 2009.

“The things that scared people three years ago don’t scare people now,” Ms. Bonauto said.

In the run-up to Wednesday’s hearing, Ms. Bonauto focused on helping Ms. Kaplan prepare. She coordinated “friend of the court” amicus briefs, and she arrived in Washington early to participate in moot court briefings.

Ms. Kaplan said it “makes me crazy” that people do not know Ms. Bonauto’s work. Like Mr. Frank, she drew an analogy to Justice Marshall.

“She conceived of a strategy just like him, over a long number of years, and then implemented it,” Ms. Kaplan said. “It was strategically brilliant, and she succeeded. No one else can say that.”

"VIDEO: Fascinating Look Behind The Scenes With Our Team Before The Supreme Court

 

 

 

The Plaintiffs

The American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) has released a remarkable inside look at the preparations last week by the plaintiffs, lawyers and the team behind the marriage equality case. LGBT Americans owe so much to the people on this video. THANK YOU!!!

Really, Justice Alito? My Struggle For Freedom Has Been Around Longer Than The Cell Phone

 

 

 

"But you want us to step in and render a decision based on an assessment of the effects of this institution which is newer than cell phones or the Internet?"

-Supreme Court Justice Alito

Perhaps we could forgive such a miserably inaccurate statement from Justice Alito because he is a devout Catholic, the older generation or just plain doesn't know any LGBT Americans. Because if he had the right information, knew LGBT people and understood the pain of the closet he would have never made such a stupid statement.

The Justice might think that his first awareness of the issue was the beginning of the struggle for freedom and full equality. He, as usual, could not be more wrong.

You see Justice Alito the reason you were not aware of the issue until after the wide spread use of the cell phone is that people like yourself begged LGBT Americans to lie, not tell the truth and stay in the closet. You most likely were among the group that used to say "Don't really care what you do in the privacy of your bedrooms but don't tell us about it". In a nation that places great value on truth that it sends people to prison for lying, you urged us to be dishonest, hide our very beings and lie to you and your friends.

If you believe that marriage equality is a new issue you can not be more wrong. From my first awareness of being gay, I yearned to be accepted, free and be able to have the same joys that loves offers every human being. Yes, from my early years I wanted a wedding where my family and friends could celebrate my love. You see Mr. Justice, the issue has always been here since time began. The urge to belong and celebrate is never a 'new issue'.

What marriage equality is, Mr Justice, are people filled with the American dream who will no longer lie to make you comfortable. A people so determine to be free that no matter what you rule in June we will have the ultimate victory.

Why? Because your children and grandchildren are no longer buying your desire to have us lie to them. Because your children and grandchildren just simply want to go to the weddings of their fellow LGBT Americans.

By the way, Justice Alito, do you know how to use an IPHONE?

VIDEO: 'Do You Hear The People Sing?"

 

 

Never has the words of a song been more powerful as we head into a second day of Supreme Court hearing. No matter what the outcome in June we will not rest until full equality and full freedom.

"Then join in the fight that will give you the right to be free. It is the music of people who will not be slaves again"

Enjoy this video and let it bring a smile to your face.

Kerry Eleveld: People Around The Nation Seize Supreme Court Moment

 

 

 

Thousands March in San Francisco Last Night 

Writing for The Advocate, journalist Kerry Eleveld reports about the impact the Supreme Court cases are having at the grassroots. You can read the entire article here but I was particularly moved by the story from Mississippi. She reports:

But to Mississippi organizer, Zach Magee, the events are both personal and a critical political statement.

“I think it’s extremely important for us here in Mississippi because a lot of times we get overlooked — Mississippi isn’t viewed as a state that has a lot of gay people in it,” says the 26-year-old Hattiesburg native who helped assemble a vigil at the state capitol building in Jackson for Tuesday night. Magee has 100 people confirmed for Jackson, which lies roughly in the middle of the state. But two other events are also being held at Gulfport and Oxford, in the southern and northern parts of the Magnolia state, respectively.

“The events are strategically placed so that no matter where are you in the state, there is an event that’s close for you to attend,” says Magee, who is the state lead for the LGBT activist organization GetEqual.

Jackson, Mississippi

Mississippi isn’t a particularly friendly place for LGBT people to live. Beyond being smack dab in the middle of the reddest swath of the country, the state outlaws same-sex marriages and adoptions and lacks hate crimes, employment, and public accommodations protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender residents.

Even as a native of the state, Magee says he sometimes feels unsafe there.

“It is my home,” he says, “but there are a lot of places that I don’t feel comfortable being by myself.”

Just last month, Marco McMillian, a man thought to be the first viable openly gay candidate in Mississippi was killed. Not many details (including motive) are known about the case, but Lawrence Reed has been charged with the death. McMillian was one of four Democrats set to face off in a May 7 primary to become mayor of Clarksville.

On a positive note, former Democratic Governor Ronnie Musgrove came out for same-sex marriage and adoption rights last week in a heartfelt op-ed at Huffington Post.

Magee was thrilled.

“I think that it’s a really big step to have a former governor come out in support of something LGBT related,” he says. “Even though he’s no longer in office, he still has a lot of support.”

But there’s still a long way to go, and Magee hopes to say in Mississippi and push for a better lot rather than seek new horizons.

“This is very important to me because it’s my life,” he says, and although the events this week are geared toward marriage, he adds, “That’s not what we are fighting for – we want full federal equality.”

Still, like many same-sex couples across the nation, Magee and his partner of two years are keeping one eye on the Supreme Court.

“If that all goes down, then we shall be at the altar,” he says.

READ ENTIRE ARTICLE HERE......

'A Change Is Gonna Come'

 

 

 

Ted Olson and David Bois - Our Lawyers

Without question one of my top five favorite songs is Sam Cooke's "A Change is Gonna Come'. There was been great version. Never will forget at one LGBT fundraiser for "Fight Back New York" when Cheyenne Jackson brought the house down singing this song.

Today we have two of the best lawyers in the nation presenting our case for freedom before the Supreme Court of the United States.  No matter what happens today or at the end of June we will be closer to freedom and full equality.  A change is definiately gonna come!  

What a perfect way to start this historic day with our brother Cheyenne Jackson singing this amazing song.

Here are the lyrics:

I was born by the river in a little tent
Oh and just like the river I've been running ever since
It's been a long, a long time coming
But I know a change gonna come, oh yes it will

It's been too hard living but I'm afraid to die
Cause I don't know what's up there beyond the sky
It's been a long, a long time coming
But I know a change gonna come, oh yes it will

I go to the movie and I go downtown somebody keep telling me don't hang around
It's been a long, a long time coming
But I know a change gonna come, oh yes it will

Then I go to my brother
And I say brother help me please
But he winds up knockin' me
Back down on my knees

There been times that I thought I couldn't last for long
But now I think I'm able to carry on
It's been a long, a long time coming
But I know a change gonna come, oh yes it will

Hell's Kitchen Journal: Our Historical Week

 

 

Gay Liberation Front In Times Square in 1970

For thirty-seven years, I have been organizing in the LGBT community in our epic struggle for freedom and full equality. Those years have seen Anita Bryant, HIV/AIDS, brutal hate crimes, burned out homes and churches, forced lobotomies, arrests, destroyed careers and people driven to suicide. Those years also has told an amazing story about our journey of courage, vision and determination. Even in times when on a daily basis we were burying our dead we did not falter.

No matter if we were at our lowest or basking in great victories our drive to reach full equality has never wane and our struggle was never hateful and we gave new meaning to the word - dignity.

This week without question is one of the most historic weeks in the history of our struggle for full equality.

The United States Supreme Court will hear two cases - DOMA and the Proposition 8 case. The final decisions from the Court (which will be handed down in June) will have historical implications for LGBT Americans - one way or another.

Both cases have now earned a place in the history books along sign decisions like Brown v. Topeka Board of Education or Roe v. Wade. Our lives will be impacted forever by just nine people passing judgement on the Constitution that will determine our future journey. In reality, no matter what the final decisions, we will continue to battle until young LGBT Americans never again has to feel the pangs of discrimination.

The decisions won't mean our job is done. The impact will be how fast we move forward and how easy the journey will be for us all.

All over the country, Americans are gathering in the next two days to give 'witness' to this historic moment. We will be gathering in villages, town squares and campuses in all fifty states. Check the Light the Way site for the event in your cities.

After all these years of struggle for us not to acknowledge this moment in some form would be close to criminal. This is our moment. We honor our dead and those pioneers before us by turning out to some event over the next two days.

For those in New York, a group of us will be giving 'witness' in Times Square - the Crossroads of the World. For one hour at 7PM on Sunday (March 24) we will stand in silence with candles, signs, lighted cell phones and flashlights to let the world know about this moment and of our struggle.

If you are in New York City, come join us tonight. Give one hour of your day to be part of this great week.

Sending all of my sisters and brothers great love and a big ole bear hug at this special time.