Dear Friend,   

This is a long email, but it may be one of the most important ones I will ever send.

As confirmation hearings of Judge Amy Coney Barrett begin today in the U.S. Senate, GLAAD is pressing members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to insist on clear answers from Judge Barrett about her views on LGBTQ rights, including the landmark Obergefell decision legalizing marriage equality. Millions of LGBTQ lives and families are in the balance, and Judge Barrett must be held accountable.

ADD YOUR VOICE TO HOLD JUDGE BARRETT ACCOUNTABLE

There is no reason or excuse for Judge Barrett to avoid sharing her philosophy and opinion in cases already decided. She has, in fact, already been discussing them, in letters she signed, and in lectures and writings. We must demand transparency and highlight any evasions and inconsistencies so Americans can know where she stands and would carry forward with her into this lifetime appointment.

We have identified three critical cases Judge Barrett must be clear about.

Obergefell v. Hodges
On day one of the Court’s new term last week, Justices Thomas and Alito signaled they want the Court to reconsider the landmark Obergefell ruling legalizing marriage equality nationwide. NPR’s Judge Barrett defended the dissenters to Obergefell more than a year after the ruling, describing it as an area of active debate over “who decides” rather than an issue of settled law that has provided basic, common sense, across-the-nation protections for millions of LGBTQ families, at zero harm to hetereosexual people or relationships. Would a Justice Barrett join this team of dissenters and their threats toLGBTQ rights?

Bostock v. Clayton County
The Court extended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to protect LGBTQ workers from being fired for being who they are, in the landmark Bostock ruling this summer. The Trump administration filed amicus briefs in support of employers who have discriminated against LGBTQ people, and has since been activating strategies to avoid fairly enforcing the ruling. These strategies reportedly include workarounds like enforcing protections only on gender assigned at birth, rather than authentic gender identity of the adult employee. How does Judge Barrett view this extension of the Civil Rights Act and the administration’s ongoing efforts to thwart it?

Fulton v. City of Philadelphia
On November 4th, the day after the election, the Court will hear a case, Fulton v City of Philadelphia, in which the Trump administration is actively fighting the city’s efforts to ensure a taxpayer-funded foster care agency includes qualified same-sex couples looking to become foster or adoptive parents. How does Judge Barrett square her view that some issues are “who decides” like this local, voter-approved ordinance protecting against discrimination, while others like Fulton lean on an argument that taxpayer-funded agencies have a right to religious exemption from following public laws?

The Supreme Court has historically acted as a remedy to ensure equal justice for the most vulnerable, including women, people of color, and LGBTQ people, when laws and majority-rule lawmakers have failed them. The next justice could determine whether this precedent continues or if the Court is used to roll back hard-fought rights.

As LGBTQ Americans and allies, we must stand up and be heard. Add your voice today. 

Sarah Kate Ellis
President & CEO, GLAAD