QUEERLY BELOVED

850 RABBIS LINE UP AGAINST SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

Attorney says 'gay' decision could be 'forever open to question'

Bob Unruh

Evidence of a pro-”gay” bias by two Supreme Court justices, especially Ruth Ginsburg, could undermine the court’s ruling on same-sex “marriage,” according to a constitutional expert.

“The decision will forever be open to question of whether it was an honest and fair decision of the court or was controlled by their personal viewpoints on the issue,” Col. John Eidsmoe told WND on Wednesday, one day after the justices heard arguments over whether same-sex “marriage” will be mandated across the U.S.

Eidsmoe is a lecturer at colleges and universities and a constitutional attorney with a successful litigation record in court cases involving religious freedom. He holds five degrees in law, theology and political science, including two doctorates, and he’s written numerous books including “Christianity & the Constitution.”

WND has reported on groups urging Ginsburg and Elena Kagan to recuse themselves from the marriage case, since they already have made public statements or taken actions supporting homosexuality, including by performing same-sex ceremonies.

To date, however, they have refused.

Just prior to the Tuesday arguments in the marriage case, Fox News reported Kagan and Ginsburg again were being urged to recuse themselves.

See the Fox News report:

Eidsmoe, who is with the religious rights-focused Foundation for Moral Law, which was led by Judge Roy Moore before he was elected as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, submitted a motion to the Supreme Court addressing the issue of the bias by Kagan and Ginsburg.

The motion stated: “Four weeks after this court granted certiorari in these cases, Justice Ginsburg was asked whether parts of the country might not accept same-sex marriage being constitutionalized. She answered: ‘I think it’s doubtful that it wouldn’t be accepted. The change in people’s attitudes on that issue has been enormous … It would not take a large adjustment.’”

A petition has been created in support of ordinances that allow Christian business owners to live by their faith.

Ginsburg’s interview was with Bloomberg News on Feb. 12.

“These extrajudicial comments about a matter pending before the court violate Canon 3A(6) of the Code of Conduct for United States judges: ‘A judge should not make public comment on the merits of a matter pending or impending in any court,’” the motion said.

If Kagan and Ginsburg do not step away from the case, “then respondent moves the entire court to review the underlying facts and grant the requested disqualification. Justices Ginsburg and Kagan have an interest – their official acts in performing same-sex marriages as Supreme Court justices – that would be substantially affected by a decision in these cases, or would at least cause their impartiality to ‘reasonably be questioned.’”

Joining in the call for Kagan and Ginsburg to be removed from the case were hundreds of members of the Rabbinical Alliance of America.

“We join many other[s] who are appalled and deeply ashamed” that Ginsburg and Kagan “have still not had the grace, or decency to adhere to the U.S. code which calls upon a justice to ‘Disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.’

“We call upon Chief Justice Roberts, President Obama and the House and Senate Judiciary committees to speak out and take the necessary steps to disqualify Kagan and Ginsburg from participating in these proceedings,” said the statement, which represented the 850 members of the organization.

“Furthermore, we invite the leadership of all religious denominations including but not limited to the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Southern Baptist Convention, as well as African America, Latino and Muslim religious organizations to join our demand that simple justice requires these two pro same-gender ‘marriage’ activist justices be disqualified.”

The group wanted the disqualifications before the case was heard, but under the operations of the Supreme Court, an announcement about a recusal could be made just about any time, including when the final opinion is released.

The rabbis said: “We ask all presidential candidates, Democrats and Republicans from Secretary Hillary Clinton to Gov. Scott Walker and everyone in between, regardless of their viewpoint on the marriage issue, to vocally advocate that to [e]nsure the integrity and impartiality of our highest court, Justices Ginsburg and Kagan must be disqualified.”

Elena Kagan

A report by The Hill cited Scott Lively of Abiding Truth Ministries, who released a statement at the Supreme Court building urging the two justices to recuse.

“Justices Ginsburg and Kagan, knowing full well that unique legal issues regarding the definition of marriage would soon come before them, deliberately officiated at so-called homosexual wedding ceremonies creating not merely the appearance of bias, but an actual and blatant conflict of interest,” Lively said, according to The Hill.

“In my personal view they have committed an unparalleled breach of judicial ethics by elevating the importance of their own favored political cause of gay rights above the integrity of the court and of our nation.”

The questions before the court were whether states are required to recognize a “marriage” between two people of the same sex and whether states have to recognize same-sex “marriage” licenses from other states under the 14th Amendment.

Eidsmoe, who currently is an adjunct professor at Oak Brook College of Law and Handong International Law School, told WND that if a Supreme Court justice does not recuse appropriately, other justices could force the issue.

He hopes it will come up as a subject of discussion when the justices meet to discuss the case, vote on it and assign someone to write an opinion.

His organization cited the Code of Conduct and law that requires a judge “shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”

The foundation statement on the controversy continued:”Because they have performed same-sex marriages, and because Justice Ginsburg has spoken publicly in favor of same-sex marriage, the foundation contends that those justices are predisposed to rule in favor of same-sex marriage and are unable or unwilling to consider this case impartially, and that their words and actions give the appearance of bias, if not bias itself.”

Foundation President Kayla Moore said: “Common sense dictates that one who has performed same-sex marriages cannot objectively rule on their legality. If these justices participate in this case, the court’s decision will forever be questioned as being based on their personal feelings rather than on the Constitution itself. With far less evidence of bias Chief Justice Roy Moore voluntarily did not vote on the recent Alabama Supreme Court case regarding same-sex marriage. Justices Ginsburg and Kagan should follow his example.”

Earlier, the American Family Association launched a campaign urging citizens to explain to their representatives in Congress why the two justices shouldn’t participate in the case.

“U.S. Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan and Ruth Bader Ginsburg should recuse themselves from any cases involving the homosexual marriage issue on the basis that they have conducted same-sex marriage ceremonies,” the campaign letter states.

A petition has been created in support of ordinances that allow Christian business owners to live by their faith.

Fox News reported Kagan performed a Sept. 21, 2014, same-sex marriage for her former law clerk, Mitchell Reich, and his partner, in Maryland. NPR reported Ginsburg performed a same-sex marriage at the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C., in August 2013, the campaign said.

Brian Camenker, whose Mass Resistance organization has released a detailed report on Kagan’s pro-homosexual activism while she was at Harvard, added, “Federal law is clear, if there’s a perception of bias. There is no question there is a question of bias [here].”

Ruth Ginsburg

His report, which he compiled with Amy Contrada of Mass Resistance and Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, originally was published when Kagan was a candidate for the court.

It’s been updated now and re-released.

The report is blunt: “Kagan is committed to the radical campaign pushing acceptance of homosexuality and transgenderism as ‘civil rights.’ Her unprecedented activism supporting that view as dean of Harvard Law School (2003-2009) calls into question her ability to judge fairly and impartially on same-sex ‘marriage’ and other homosexuality- or transgender-related issues that may come before the nations’ highest court.”

The report continued: “There should be grave concern over Kagan’s issues advocacy concerning ‘sexual orientation.’ Even before her nomination to the court, her enthusiastic and committed pro-homosexuality activism at Harvard (including her recruitment to the faculty of radical ‘gay’ activist scholars like former ACLU lawyer William Rubenstein and elevation of radical out lesbian Professor Janet Halley) was highly significant for the nation. 

Now, it is imperative that senators and the U.S. public gain an accurate understanding of the radical, pro-homosexual environment that was Kagan’s home at Harvard – and the GLBT legal agenda that Kagan herself helped foster as dean.”

Kagan’s work at Harvard, the report said, included her legitimization of “gay rights” and law studies.

Others:

• Kagan recruited former ACLU lawyer (and former ACT-Up activist) William Rubenstein, an expert on “queer” legal issues.
• Kagan promoted and facilitated the “transgender” legal agenda during her tenure at Harvard, including a “Transgender Law” course.
• She “encouraged Harvard students to get involved in homosexual activist legal work.”
• She “engaged in ongoing radical advocacy opposing ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’ and demanding an end to the ban on homosexuals serving in the military. Her highly partisan actions are unbecoming a future judge – especially one who would be called upon to adjudicate such weighty and divisive matters.”
• She continued to encourage students at Harvard to “come up with ideas of how to harass” military recruiters even after she had lost a legal fight that tried to keep them off campus. “Kagan’s actions blatantly disrespected our military and exposed her as the out-of-touch, socially leftist academic that she is.”

Kagan also moderated a panel on “LGBT law” that was promoted as “A Celebration of LGBT Life at Harvard.”

The report said: “In her role as dean, Kagan oversaw the HLS curriculum and new faculty appointments. Thus, she must have endorsed the following HLS offerings as legitimate subjects and viewpoints (i.e., ‘gay rights’ and ‘transgender rights’ are true civil rights; any disagreement or disapproval is therefore illegal discrimination). One of her major efforts as dean was ‘modernizing’ the curriculum including eliminating a required Constitution course, and instead requiring international law courses.”

Kagan also attended the first reunion of the Harvard Law School LGBT alumni, the report said. “Reportedly it was the first event of its kind in the nation.”

Ginsburg, meanwhile, apparently has not been involved in public advocacy, but she has voiced her opinion, as WND reported.

See the comments:

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/04/850-rabbis-line-up-against-same-sex-marriage/#MhwBCuml5YdVuMMq.99

My comments: America elected a godless, Socialist, Secular Humanist president and he has appointed, a godless, Socialist, Secular Humanist woman, Kagan, to the Supreme Court. They are both HATERS of God, His Christ Jesus and His Word as demonstrated by their actions. For this, America will pay a TERRIBLE PRICE.