Supreme Court

The Family Research Council has been adamantly defending the clinic founded by Rep. Michele Bachmann and her husband since an undercover investigation revealed that the clinic was practicing discredited ‘ex-gay’ reparative therapy. The Religious Right group, which recently urged people to pray for countries that criminalize homosexuality, wants members to pray for anti-gay laws and clinics that offer “help for homosexuals to break free from addiction to homosexuality.” The FRC writes in its latest prayer alert:

Christian Counseling under Assault – This week a homosexual activist group reported findings from their undercover “sting” operation at Minnesota Christian counseling clinic owned by Republican Presidential candidate Michelle Bachman and her husband, Marcus. Sympathetic national media seemed shocked that the Christian counseling center offered help for homosexuals to break free from addiction to homosexuality through faith in Jesus Christ. Where will the homosexual assault on religious liberty stop?

May God open the eyes of all Americans to the truth regarding natural marriage and sexuality vs. homosexuality as well as homosexual rights vs. religious liberty. May officials at every level stand up for natural marriage and sexuality. May the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and state marriage amendments be upheld in the courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court. May our military men be protected from the introduction of homosexuality into their ranks. May we all stand up for our First Amendment freedoms! (Ps 82: all; Is 42:6-7; Mt 19:4; Rom 1:24-28; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 2 Tim 2:24-25)

Judson Phillips of Tea Party Nation is taking a stand for the Birther movement, months after President Barack Obama released his long-form birth certificate to quash discredited claims that he was born outside of the U.S. Naturally, conspiracy theorists were not satisfied by evidence, and the president of one of the country’s leading tea party groups still doubts the President Obama’s citizenship. In a column sent to Tea Party Nation members praising Orly Taitz, the fanatical birther activist who has floated armed rebellion against Obama is now embarking on yet another lawsuit based on research from the birther website World Net Daily. Phillips writes that Taitz should receive an award from the American Bar Association for her campaign to prove that Obama isn’t eligible to serve as president, suggesting she may “deserve a place among the great lawyers of this country”:

Orly Taitz has waged an almost one-woman war on the eligibility issue. She is absolutely convinced that Barack Obama is not legally qualified to be President. She had endured insults, threats, some from Judges, fines and every roadblock the Obama regime could throw her way. Had she been as tenacious on a similar issue with George W. Bush, she would be the toast of the legal community.

Orly probably does not want an ABA award, but she may be getting closer to something of great importance to her. It is the “holy grail” of the eligibility movement.

Orly Taitz may be about to get the original, type written birth certificate of Barack Obama.

…

If Obama was really born in Hawaii and everything is as advertised, his lawyers can simply let the birth certificate be provided to Orly Taitz and that will end the matter. Given the history of the Obama regime and his defense of his birth certificate, even though he has released a forged birth certificate, that is unlikely.

…

Some conservatives derisively dismiss anyone who supports the eligibility issue as a “birther.” There certainly is enough evidence out there to raise questions. The significance of the eligibility issue is what happens if we are right. If Obama was never eligible to serve as President, everything he did is void. Two Supreme Court Justices, gone. A host of Federal Judges, gone. Every bill he signed, gone. Obamacare, gone.

What are the chances of this happening? Who knows? The bigger question is, given the potential reward of undoing everything Obama has done, why any conservative dismisses the eligibility issues, as “birtherism” is simply beyond belief.

If Orly Taitz wins, she will deserve a place among the great lawyers of this country, who fought incredible odds to win justice. The left wing American Bar Association will never give her an award for this. But I’m willing to bet she’s not saving any space on her wall for an ABA award either.

Ted Beahr of the Christian Film and Television Commission and the publisher of Movieguide, “movie reviews through a Christian perspective,” wants New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and state legislators who backed marriage equality should be “subject to indictment, trial and just punishment.” Writing for WorldNetDaily, Beahr believes that New York’s marriage equality law not only stands in the face of God’s law but is also unconstitutional, because Beahr says that the Constitution must comply with God’s law. Beahr asserts that “the homosexualization” of America is part of a Communist conspiracy and ends the column by misattributing a famous quote of Supreme Court Justice John Marshall to Karl Marx in order to bolster his case:

Pages could be, have been and should be written about the progressive Marxist destruction of the American constitutional republic. And pages could be, have been and should be written about the destructive nature of the homosexualization of the culture. With regard to the illegal action of the New York state government, it is more important to understand clearly that the civil government has no authority in area of the free exercise of religion such as marriage. If it has no authority and tries to exercise power not vested to it, then the state is acting illegally.

…

We need to stand for God's law in the face of the power grab by those in civil authority who know no restraints.

New York and the other increasingly socialized states have not only violated God's law, they have also violated their own Constitution and the will of the governed. When they do that, they are just like King George. They have abdicated their moral and legal authority and are subject to indictment, trial and just punishment.

Now, all those who freely exercise their inalienable right to religious faith must stop acting like useful idiots and fellow travelers by going along to get along. Instead, they must stand for their God-given rights by proclaiming loud and clear that these New York government servants have crossed the line into illegal activity that has no authority and makes them criminals.

Often, people of faith and values do not stand up because they have been slowly boiled in the brine of socialism and so give the states powers they have no authority to use. Often the state or federal government creates the problem by violating our individual rights to property, estates, income, etc., through the Marxist device of illicit taxation. Then the government argues that the state needs to govern marriage to alleviate the tax burdens the state created so that it can encourage marriage. Such circular and dishonest reasoning has almost deceived the very electorate.

Now the people must throw off the stupor of Marxist doublespeak and return to the basic principles that made them free to live at peace in the American republic that recognizes "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

As Marx proclaimed, "The power to tax is the power to destroy." Do not let it destroy godly marriage and families!

• Steve Benen: How To End A Culture-War Fight.

• Judd Legum @ Think Progress: Santorum: Poor History Scores A Result Of ‘Conscious Effort’ By ‘The Left’ To Keep Students Uninformed.

• Minnesota Independent: Bradlee Dean: A Week Before House Prayer, Zellers Asked To Be On My Radio Show.

• Dahlia Lithwick @ Slate: Class Dismissed: The Supreme Court Decides That The Women Of Wal-Mart Can’t Have Their Day In Court.

• TNR: Rick Perry: Why His Texas Record Is Much Worse Than You Think.

As Governor Rick Perry ponders a run for the presidency, it is already clear that he doesn’t mind working with the most radical of anti-gay leaders. Perry’s The Response prayer rally is hosted by the American Family Association, whose spokesman Bryan Fischer wants to see homosexuality criminalized, and former activists with The Call, a prayer rally that defended Uganda’s 'kill-the-gays' bill. Other individuals working with The Response include militantly anti-gay leaders Jim Garlow, Cindy Jacobs, David Barton and David Welch.

Now, the Des Moines Register reports that Perry aides are reaching out to Bob Vander Plaats, the head of The Family Leader. Vander Plaats led the successful campaign to remove three Iowa Supreme Court justices who backed marriage equality and is closely linked to (and funded by) the AFA. Vander Plaats is also tied to an effort that likened being gay to being a cigarette smoker and once said that allowing equal marriage rights for gay couples threatened the system of private property and gun-ownership rights. One former adviser said that Vander Plaats is “obsessed with the gay marriage issue.”

Since Vander Plaats is a powerful Religious Right figure who has hosted presidential candidates like Michele Bachmann, Tim Pawlenty, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, and Herman Cain, it is no surprise that Perry is in touch with him:

A supporter of possible presidential candidate Rick Perry of Texas telephoned an Iowa conservative leader today, inquiring about the political scene in Iowa.

“They were asking questions, asking my take on Iowa, how things are lining up and also making sure I know they like Rick Perry,” said Bob Vander Plaats, president of the Family Leader, an Iowa-based conservative advocacy group that’s hosting a presidential lecture series.

…

Vander Plaats said he has so far spoke with two Texans and one other out-of-stater, but declined to share their names because the conversations were intended to be private.

None of the callers included Perry’s political strategist Dave Carney, or anyone who currently works for Perry, he said. “They’re just people that are around him and they think he’d be good for the race,” Vander Plaats said.

Only a writer for the ultraconservative WorldNetDaily would believe that the Religious Right is too soft on the issue of gay rights.

WND’s Josh Craddock of the Institute for Cultural Communicators claims that the reason more Americans support marriage equality is because social conservatives haven’t fought gay rights or attacked the LGBT community enough. Responding to Focus on the Family president Jim Daly’s recent claim that the Right Wing “probably lost” the debate over equal marriage rights, Craddock alleges that organizations like Focus on the Family simply didn’t fight gay rights hard enough.

He points to the case of the campaign for Colorado’s Amendment 2, the unconstitutional law that barred anti-discrimination ordinances from covering gays and lesbians, protections that anti-gay activists said granted “special rights” and ceded too much ground to the gay-rights movement. Craddock argues that Religious Right activists should have more vigorously and forcefully opposed the decriminalization of homosexuality and letting anyone who was gay or sympathizes with gay rights from serving in public office:

Rewind to 1992's Colorado campaign on Amendment 2, designed to ban homosexuals from receiving special rights based on their sexual orientation. It was then that Dr. James Dobson and the vice president of public policy for Focus on the Family, Tom Minnery, adopted the unwise but politically opportunistic pro-Amendment 2 campaign slogan "Equal rights, not special rights." If homosexuals are entitled to "equal rights," then why should homosexual couples be prohibited from marrying? Focus on the Family lost the gay-marriage debate in 1992 when they broke with 3,500 years of Judeo-Christian history and sided with Hillary, Hollywood and the humanists by legitimizing homosexual behavior.

Incidentally, that victory was short-lived. It was overturned in Romer v. Evans (1996) with the help of a prominent Washington, D.C., lawyer who specialized in oral arguments before the Supreme Court. Less than a decade later, Dr. Dobson actually supported that attorney's bid to become the nation's next chief justice. In 2005, John Roberts was confirmed to the Supreme Court.

Most recently, Focus on the Family announced that they wouldn't oppose a homosexual nominated to the Supreme Court over sexual orientation. A spokesperson for the organization commented in 2009 that the nominee's sexual orientation "should never come up" because "it's not even pertinent to the equation." Not even relevant to know if an individual appointed for life to the highest court in the nation has a traditional view of the family, or is a self-avowed homosexual? Where did that come from? Certainly America's Founding Fathers would be shocked, since they followed lock-step with Christian Western tradition that criminalized homosexuality.

Today's conservative Christian leaders believe what was scandalous just 30 years ago: that homosexuality should be legal. Back in the Dark Ages, way back in 1986 when the Supreme Court upheld Georgia's anti-sodomy law, Christian leaders actually believed that homosexual behavior should be criminal. Their beliefs have changed rather quickly with the culture, preferring to garner social acceptance through a moral fluidity that reminds me of Groucho Marx's quip: "If you don't like my principles, I have others."

Despite victories for traditional marriage in states across the Union, social conservatives are losing because they've missed the heart of the issue. Same-sex marriage is a diversion. The real battle is over the morality of homosexuality itself.

The Wall Street Journal today features an extensive profile on Newt Gingrich’s vast network of political organizations, including American Solutions, Renewing American Leadership (ReAL), and Gingrich Productions. The paper reports that Gingrich’s “network has amassed more than 1.7 million voter and donor contacts and raised $32 million between 2009 and 2010—more than all his potential 2012 rivals combined.” Gingrich also helped steer $150,000 to American Family Association Action to help defeat three Iowa State Supreme Court justices that ruled in favor of marriage equality. Along with ReAL, which is led by anti-gay activist Jim Garlow, and his support for the AFA, Gingrich has made overtures to other Religious Right groups and leaders including John Hagee, Bryan Fischer, Janet Porter, Liberty University, Liberty Counsel, The Family Leader and the Minnesota Family Council.

But will Gingrich’s financial influence, religious documentaries and appeals to prominent Religious Right figures translate to real support from activists who might be wary of backing a thrice-married adulterer? Fischer remains a skeptic, but Iowa’s Bob Vander Plaats, who coordinated the anti-judge campaign, is still grateful for Gingrich’s significant monetary aid:

Mr. Gingrich hasn't run a truly competitive campaign in 21 years. He is given to public gaffes, most recently criticizing President Barack Obama for failing to back the rebels fighting Col. Moammar Gadhafi, only to reverse himself after Mr. Obama ordered U.S. planes into Libya. He resigned from Congress in 1998 under an ethics cloud, after his party suffered a historic midterm loss. It was later revealed that he was having an affair with a congressional aide.

Even groups that have allied with him, such as the conservative American Family Association, aren't poised to back him, citing his two messy divorces and three marriages. "He is brilliant, and has much to offer. But he isn't what we need in the Oval Office," said the AFA's director of issue analysis, Bryan Fischer.

…

Wearing an array of organizational hats, he has met repeatedly with pastors, trained local candidates, consulted with doctors on his proposed health-care innovations and met with local refiners to tout ethanol. After raising money through one of his groups, Mr. Gingrich funneled $150,000 in seed money to a successful campaign last fall to oust three Iowa Supreme Court judges who supported gay marriage.

"Newt's role was quiet and very low key, but it was pivotal," said Bob Vander Plaats, a well-known Iowa conservative who led the anti-judges campaign.

…

The heavy emphasis on religion is part of his long push to atone for his multiple divorces, according to people who know him. "He was very direct about this," said Rev. Brad Sherman, a prominent Iowa evangelical leader, recounting a session Mr. Gingrich had last year with a small group of Iowa religious leaders. "He said he had deep regrets, and asked our forgiveness."

Today, the law firm King & Spalding decided against defending the Defense Of Marriage Act on behalf of the House of Representatives, leading Paul Clement, the partner who was going to take charge of DOMA’s defense, to resign . Groups and leaders opposed to marriage equality are unsurprisingly irate at King & Spalding, and have found a new hero in Clement:

Brian Brown, National Organization for Marriage:

Brown contrasted Clement’s courageous stand for integrity with the cowardice of King & Spalding Chairman Robert Hays. “In contrast to the principled stand by Paul Clement, King & Spalding, through their Chairman Robert Hays, has demonstrated a shocking lack of professional ethics and shown cowardice under fire. This law firm has shown itself to be without principle,” Brown said. “Representing clients who may be unpopular in some quarters is what lawyers do. The actions of King & Spalding would suggest that they believe an accused murderer is entitled to a vigorous defense, but the thousands-year old understanding of marriage is not, even though our marriage law was passed with overwhelming bi-partisan majorities and signed into law by President Clinton.”

NOM pledged an investigation into the actions of King & Spalding and urged its supporters to contact Hays to express their outrage over the firm’s decision. “We will convene a panel of legal experts and ethicists to determine if any rules of professional conduct have been violated, or if the firm has acted illegally in reaching their decision. We already know they have violated the moral imperative of acting in good faith and fair dealing. If our review concludes that the firm has violated any statutes or rules of professional conduct, we will initiate the appropriate disciplinary complaints,” Brown said.

Tony Perkins, Family Research Council:

"We commend Paul Clement for standing firm in the face of homosexual activists who seek to censor any opposition - even in the courtroom - to their campaign to overturn the marriage laws of 45 states.

"It is a shocking revelation that King & Spalding would rather lose their most brilliant and talented Supreme Court lawyer than confront a smear campaign by homosexual activists.

…

"The truth is not afraid of a good debate. What are homosexual activists afraid of? If they are right, then they should welcome a robust legal argument. We are convinced that the truth will win out in the end and DOMA will be upheld as constitutional. A person who doesn't want his opponent to have a good lawyer is an opponent who knows that the law isn't on his side.

"We call on President Obama and the U.S. Congress to denounce these unacceptable smear and silence tactics. The American people and our system of justice deserve better."

Mat Staver, Liberty Counsel:

Mat Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel and dean of Liberty University School of Law, says Clement is demonstrating legel "class and integrity" -- and that the decision by King & Spaulding was an incorrect move. "Where we see this clash coming between homosexuality and religious rights or other rights or just simply common sense and civility, I think we're seeing it played out right there in the King & Spalding law firm," he tells OneNewsNow.

Staver says because of certain political complaints from branches within the law firm, King & Spaulding decided to drop the case. "That, I think, illustrates the clash of the homosexual agenda, and the frank intolerance that we see manifested in some of the individuals pushing that agenda."

Jay Sekulow, American Center for Law and Justice:

Paul Clement is an honorable advocate. He understands that when an attorney engages a client, and agrees to defend a position in court, that is what he must do. We applaud his efforts to move forward in defending DOMA - now with another law firm.

We know that Paul will provide a sound and thorough defense to DOMA, which we expect to be upheld by the courts. We will file an amicus brief defending DOMA as the case unfolds.

We applaud Paul's commitment to the legal profession, his integrity, and his desire and dedication to carry out his professional responsibilities in this case.

After the Religious Right’s successful campaign, with massive funding from Newt Gingrich, to remove three state Supreme Court justices in the 2010 elections who backed marriage equality, now the Iowa GOP is pushing for the impeachment of the remaining justices. Bob Vander Plaats, the anti-gay activist who led the drive to remove the Justices and heads The Family Leader, has previously called for the resignation of the entire Supreme Court and advocated for their removal over the marriage equality ruling in Varnum v. Brien. He is also building ties with likely presidential candidates as Gingrich, Tim Pawlenty, Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul and Herman Cain have either addressed or plan to speak during The Family Leader’s “presidential lecture series.”

Despite the heightened activism of the state’s social conservatives, Lynda Waddington of the Iowa Independent reports that the impeachment resolution faces an uphill battle:

Iowa House Republicans drew an immediate negative reaction late Thursday when they filed four articles of impeachment, one for each remaining member of the Iowa Supreme Court that participated in an April 2009 decision that struck down a legislative ban on same-sex marriage as a violation of the state’s equal protection clause.

The four House resolutions target Supreme Court Chief Justice Mark Cady (HR 48) and Justices Brent Appel (HR 47), Daryl Hecht (HR 49) and David Wiggins (HR 50) for “malfeasance in office” specifically for their ruling in the Varnum v. Brien case, saying that each justice “exercis[ed] functions properly belonging to the legislative and executive departments.” …

The articles of impeachment drafted and filed by the five legislators were also immediately attacked by Justice Not Politics, a nonpartisan group that formed in advance of the 2010 retention election in hopes of bolstering support for the three justices on the November ballot and to stress the non-political nature of the Iowa Judicial Branch.

…

Opposition to retention was led by Bob Vander Plaats, who formed Iowa for Freedom following an unsuccessful GOP gubernatorial primary bid. The ouster movement was well financed by out-of-state anti-gay interest groups. Currently, Vander Plaats is employed as head of The Family Leader organization, which has traveled the state in hopes of “building on the momentum” of the November ousters.

The three ousted justices were replaced by Gov. Terry Branstad in February, following a winnowing of candidates by the State Judicial Nominating Commission.

Although Republicans hold a majority in the Iowa House, it remains doubtful that the articles of impeachment will live beyond their referral to the Judiciary Committee.