Supreme Court: What would Trump's proposal mean for marriage for all?
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who served on the US Supreme Court, is dead. President Donald Trump has now nominated Amy Coney Barrett as her successor. But what would an appropriate appointment mean for the USA and marriage for all?
Amy Coney Barrett is known for her conservative views. Once in office, so many hopes of queer Americans for a more tolerant future could be dashed.
How might Amy Coney Barrett affect the future of many Americans?
Amy Coney Barrett stands for the conservative lifestyle. Among other things, she could speak out against marriage for all. Of course, the very Americans who have fought for this for years know this. They are accordingly sceptical about the president's proposal.
Particularly alarming: if Amy Coney Barrett joins the judges already in office, there will be more conservative than liberal judges on the Surpreme Court. Accordingly, it would be almost easy to pass laws around classic issues such as said marriage for all, abortion and co. without the LGBTQ community or, for example, single mothers and others, and to address their concerns.
And: the judges who take office in the Surpreme Court work here for life. They cannot be elected for a specific period of time. If conservative forces gain the upper hand here, the rights of the LGBTQ community - both in the individual states and in America as a whole - could be significantly restricted.
In various interviews, Amy Coney Barrett repeatedly emphasised that marriage for her is a union between a man and a woman. Her statements on transsexual people have also made the Scene have already made us sit up and take notice a time or two.
Trump is enthusiastic
Despite all the concerns of the LGBTQ community, one person is enthusiastic about his proposal: Donald Trump. He values Amy Coney Barrett as one of the best legal experts in the USA. The fact that new judges are nominated by the sitting president is not new. This is a classic procedure by which the "Most powerful man in the world" also his Position can secure. For example, nominating a judge who holds the same opinion as you on many important issues ensures that your power continues to reverberate a little after the presidency.
Things are supposed to get exciting from 12 October 2020. That's when the hearing of the proposed candidate will start. After that, everything could move relatively quickly until the Senate finally has the final say.
Many Democrats, however, believe that the process of appointing a new judge is starting too early. They argue that a decision on the new person on the US Supreme Court should only be made after the election of the US president.
Are the concerns around restrictable rights understandable?
Anyone who looks into the history of the LGBTQ community in the USA will realise that a lot has already been achieved here, among other things.
One thing is certain, however: America, the land of freedom, has not yet managed to achieve full equality, partly due to strong conservative forces.
However, the more conservative the Supreme Court becomes, the more difficult it will be to maintain this course. The US Supreme Court is extremely powerful. Whoever sits here decides on the future of millions of people - including those who are in a minority. It remains to be seen whether the Democrats' proposal to wait to fill the currently vacant chair will perhaps be considered after all.
But either way: it will certainly be difficult to follow in the footsteps of such a popular judge as Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
You might also like this exciting article: Kramp-Karrenbauer apologises to homosexuals