Tuesday, June 16, 2020

BRIEF UPDATE: No, There Isn't A Silver Lining

There were some people out there trying to discern a silver lining to yesterday's dismantling of the US Constitution and it's replacement with the Diversity Constitution. People like Sean Trende, who whispered, Hey, psssst! Roberts went along with the majority so he could appoint Gorsuch to write the opinion, rather than Ginsburg. Or Kagan or Sotomayor. It's not as radical an opinion as could have been.

Sorry. There is NO good news in this. Anyone who thinks this will not lead to the total wokening of American law and society simply hasn't been paying attention to how our system works and has worked for decades now. Yes, Gorsuch makes all the usual noises, denying that the logic of his opinion is a slippery slope, but we all know that the entire edifice of Classical Liberalism (libertarianism) is nothing but one long and exceedingly slippery slope. We've seen it, beginning with Griswold, then Roe, and all its progeny--Casey, Lawrence, and so on.

And so Gorsuch writes:

Whether other policies and practices might or might not qualify as unlawful discrimination or find justifications under other provisions of Title VII are questions for future cases, not these.

What's he talking about? What are these "other policies and practices"? C'mon, we all know. This is about bathrooms and locker rooms and dress codes. It's about diversity in all its supposed glory! It's about the Queering of America. And Gorsuch knows that. He just says that this stuff is all up in the air to string us normals along, to tamp down resistance to his ukase. Thus he pretends that anyone who disagrees is jumping to conclusions--they're just imagining things:

under Title VII itself, they say sex-segregated bathrooms, locker rooms, and dress codes will prove unsustainable after our decision today. But none of these other laws are before us; we have not had the benefit of adversarial testing about the meaning of their terms, and we do not prejudge any such question today. Under Title VII, too, we do not purport to address bathrooms, locker rooms, or anything else of the kind. The only question before us is whether an employer who fires someone simply for being homosexual or transgender has discharged or otherwise discriminated against that individual “because of such individual’s sex.”

But none of us are fooled. Progs will be passing rules and regulations and laws, pushing the envelope, coercing the normals to bow to the Diversity constitutional order. Who really thinks Gorsuch is about to draw a line, now or in the future after having had "the benefit of adversarial" briefing? Who is reassured, when Gorsuch tells them that the SCOTUS will decide who can use which bathroom? Yes, this is what Constitutional law has descended to. Or, rather, this is what the American people have descended--waiting to be told what bathroom to use.

Because the sad fact is that the American people have, for the most part, acquiesced in this result already. They have submitted generations of their children to indoctrination in liberal run government schools, where their children have been subjected to indoctrination in the goodness of Queerness through "Sex Education." Maleness is the enemy in 21st century America.

At least Thomas and Alito weren't fooled:

What the Court has done today––interpreting discrimination because of “sex” to encompass discrimination because of sexual orientation or gender identity––is virtually certain to have far-reaching consequences. Over 100 federal statutes prohibit discrimination because of sex. The briefs in these cases have called to our attention the potential effects that the Court’s reasoning may have under some of these laws, but the Court waves those considerations aside. As to Title VII itself, the Court dismisses questions about “bathrooms, locker rooms, or anything else of the kind.” Ante, at 31. And it declines to say anything about other statutes whose terms mirror Title VII’s. 
The Court’s brusque refusal to consider the consequences of its reasoning is irresponsible.

"Irresponsible" is actually a pretty mild way to put it.

But don't take my word for it. Helen Andrews has an excellent article at AmCon, Justice Gorsuch Just Opened Pandora’s Box, that should disabuse you of any notion that the penumbra you're being asked to perceive is a silver lining. Here are edited excerpts, but I urge you to do yourself a favor--follow the link and read it all. Andrews will clue you in to all the gory details:

Six months ago journalist Christopher Caldwell published a book asserting that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 had grown into a “rival constitution” that superseded the old Constitution. The New York Times review singled out for particular ridicule the sentence on the penultimate page of The Age of Entitlement where Caldwell advises conservatives that “the only way back to the free country of their ideals was through the repeal of the civil rights laws.”
No one is laughing now. 
[Gorsuch's decree] is not a narrow ruling that just means you can’t fire a person for being gay. Extending civil rights law to protect a whole new category carries with it a host of ancillary protections. 
Harassment is a form of workplace discrimination. An employee can’t be subjected to a “hostile work environment” because of their membership in a protected class. Under Bostock, an LGBT employee could allege a hostile work environment if a coworker expressed the wrong opinion about Prop 8 or said he believed a person’s sex is determined at birth. Some employers are already justifying firing workers who won’t use someone’s preferred pronouns because discrimination law requires it. Misgendering, they say, is harassment. 
Diversity training is a multi-billion dollar industry because of Title VII.  
De facto hiring quotas are another inevitable consequence of civil rights law as it has been interpreted.  
It is no use protesting that the text of Title VII doesn’t mandate any of this, or that the Bostock opinion limits itself to outlawing explicit policies against hiring LGBT workers. The whole story of employment discrimination law, from 1964 to today, is an endless parade of new mandates not specified in the statute being hatched by human resources departments, adopted by companies eager to fend off lawsuits, and ultimately incorporated into case law. 
Anti-discrimination law is kept vague for precisely this reason. It gives the activists more room to get creative.  
Title VII doesn’t require performance evaluations, grievance procedures, written job descriptions, speech codes, minority hiring targets, or diversity bonuses—yet all of these have been extrapolated from it.  
And of course the Bostock ruling won’t stay confined to employment law. The majority opinion protests, disingenuously, that “sex-segregated bathrooms, locker rooms, and dress codes” are “questions for future cases.” But federal law is full of prohibitions on sex discrimination (Justice Alito’s dissent lists over 100 such statutes), and every one of those will have to be reconsidered in light of today’s ruling. 
Gorsuch claims that yesterday’s ruling was grounded in judicial modesty. It doesn’t matter that sodomy was illegal in 49 states when the Civil Rights Act was passed, he says. If you can’t fire a woman for marrying a man, you can’t fire a man for doing the same without discriminating on the basis of sex, simple as that. Alito’s dissent accuses such rigid textualism of treating laws “as if they were messages picked up by a powerful radio telescope from a distant and utterly unknown civilization.” 
Once conservatives start thinking about what changes would have to be made to civil rights law before the left’s grip on our country’s institutions can begin to be loosened, it won’t stop with clarifications to the definition of sex.

I'm here to tell you, nothing will be the same after this. The Left is coming for the normals. And "conservatives" have given them the legal tools to enforce submission.

A final thought. Donald Trump owed his election in great part to the visceral opposition of normals to PC attempts to outlaw normality. Isn't that essentially what we're currently seeing and have been seeing since the election? Anyone who takes a deep dive into the true ideology behind BLM and Antifa will soon learn that it's really all about sex. It's about the Queer Constitution. My question is: How will Trump respond to this? Because if he doesn't respond in some meaningful way, then Gorsuch and Roberts have handed the Progs the most effective voter suppression tool ever.

UPDATE: Joy Pullman at The Federalist gets right to the bottom line:

SCOTUS’s Transgender Ruling Firebombs The Constitution
The ruling will lead to a tsunami of polarizing court cases and further degradation of Americans’ natural rights to free speech, to free association, and to worshipping God as their consciences require. 
In Monday’s ruling inserting “gender identity” into the word “sex” in a 1964 employment law, the U.S. Supreme Court called a man a woman, possibly leading to eventually forcing everyone else to do so also. ... All this in the name of “equality,” a word that has become a totalitarian weapon.


  1. Win the Presidency many times since 1980? Check. Appoint nine 'conservative' Supreme Court justices since 1981? Check. Elect majority Republican Senate and House numerous times? Check. Elect Republican governors and state legislators? Check. Pass pro-life legislation? Check. Defend marriage propositions successfully passed by the People? Check.

    All taken away by rulers in robes.

    1. This illustrates the bankruptcy of the Classical Liberalism that has been the default public ideology since the Age of the Enlightenment. Our "intellectuals" brought up in this way of thinking willy nilly end up following it down the slippery slope because they're incapable of thinking any other way--they're de facto indoctrinated and can't free themselves. This is what Deneen is talking about.

  2. Gorsuch is dead to me. I'm sure that he will occasionally rule in ways that please me. Nothing can erase this failure.

  3. BLM “What We Believe” (excerpted):

    We are guided by the fact that all Black lives matter, regardless of actual or perceived sexual identity, gender identity, gender expression, economic status, ability, disability, religious beliefs or disbeliefs, immigration status, or location.

    We make space for transgender brothers and sisters to participate and lead.

    We are self-reflexive and do the work required to dismantle cisgender privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence.(Snip)

    We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.

    We foster a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual (unless s/he or they disclose otherwise).

    Founded by two lesbians and a transgender “woman”.

    1. Exactly. Gorsuch and Roberts have ripped off the masks--they're de facto BLM activists. BLM is really just a logical working out of the ideology behind Classical Liberalism--expressed in racialist terms. But the fact that it's really just expressing that LCD version of Classical Liberalism is what makes it so hard to resist for anyone who has been indoctrinated in our schools in that ideology.

    2. And, Bebe, the companion site "Movement for Black Lives" (M4BL), has also, from its start, been disproportionally aimed toward LGBTQ issues, see
      They also make clear other key aspects of their agenda, e.g.
      "We are *anti-capitalist*: ... Black people will never achieve liberation under the current global racialized capitalist system."

      And, Mark, an editing note: should I guess that, when you write "Gorsuch and Roberts have *ended* the Progs the most effective voter suppression tool ever",
      you mean "have BOOSTed the Progs the most effective...."?
      (How could this ruling *end* the Progs suppression efforts?)

      (I'm still preoccupied with family stuff, but the above really seems important now.)

    3. Ha! Fooled you this time. I meant "handed".

    4. That would've been my 2nd guess!

    5. Death in the Memory Unit

  4. Jury nullification seems to be the only relief remaining in this age of nihilism.


  5. It seems to me that Title 9 is also toast.

    Rob S

  6. Gotta love Kavanaugh's dissent: "I'm unable to agree, but I really like you so please don't hurt me."

    Chuck Schumer's threat was heard loud and clear.

    1. Yeah, pathetic. But about what you'd expect from a guy who surrounds himself with exclusively girl law clerks.

    2. I've never understood the "all-female" clerks thing. What is that? Is it supposed to be some kind of virtue? I don't get it.

    3. It was said during his SCOTUS confirmation hearing to bolster his being a supporter of women, not an abuser.

    4. He actually has a long history of way disproportionate girl law clerks. His wife should worry. If she's not worried, there's another problem.

    5. @Bebe

      I mean the fact that he has this "policy".

  7. Silver Linings are:

    1. Judicial Supremacy just took a huge hit
    2. Respect for decisions of the Supreme Court by the hidden majority.
    3. Transgenders in Women Sports is a huge issue for some.

    >tsunami of polarizing court cases

    1. I agree. When Gorsuch and Roberts ripped their assclown masks off to reveal themselves as the face of oppression, respect went out the window. I don't think they thought this through very well.

  8. When Roberts said there are no Trump judges and Obama judges, he was fooling himself. He's an Obama judge.

    What a year 2020 has been, so far. Not in a good way. A lot have made a play on 2020 as 20/20, a la, vision. My vision is 20/20, rhetorically speaking and I see things the way they are in this country.

    Like the old Mad magazine cartoon, I need to break my glasses so i don't see all the violence, poverty, despair, etc.

    1. Unless Durham kicks ass, and DJT beats Biden, this year will be heaven, compared to what follows.

    2. Mouse,

      Thanks for that cheery note.

      I'm still predicted the reelection of Donald. I'm cautiously optimistic, though trending to neutral, on the Reps taking the House back and holding the Senate. If we get more GOPe, we'll get more of the same.

    3. I can see Joe's point on the election.

      The current craziness is off the scale. And it's 5 more months to election. And I wonder what's next?

      My gut is the GOP will sweep the house, senate, and Presidency. The Democrats are being hurt by the BLM and supporters, which is enforcing a super far left ideology and cultural revolution. Trump is playing rolling with the punches for now. He is waiting till the actual election season starts, and is letting the opposition dig themselves deeper. And they are doing an amazing job of that. Trump is living "Never interrupt the enemy when they are making a mistake".

      I am amazed at how enormous / sprawling all the forces are against Trump. It boggles my mind. The recent anti Trump Generals shocked me, even if they were all Generals under Obama and part of his failed policy. And then the Supreme Court seems to have gone anti Trump (Transgender ruling when an executive order was being done, 9th circuit on sanctuary cities, and the CA Religious Covid 19 Ruling after DOJ was hinting at actions).


    4. If Durham gets it done, the changed atmosphere could put the GOPe in a real corner.

    5. @ Ray

      I know things are bad, but I just can't believe there won't be a strong backlash against "the current craziness." The thing is, we need a direction to go in, and our societal and cultural institutions have failed us. One election--as we can see--isn't enough.

    6. Ray, you ask what's next before the election? Here's a guess or two:

      1. The Wuhan Lab releases Covid20, destroying most Western economies for good.

      2. China has a military conflict with India and escalates SE Sea islands, NK fires some rockets, hacks some companies.

      3. Israel annexes West Bank, setting off intifada (Hamas funded by Qatar).

      4. Turkey and Russia (both predisposed against Trump) escalate Syrian proxy war.

      5. UK bend the knee to EU, accepting weak FTA.

      6. Amid all the chaos, Durham chooses to delay indictments till everything settles down.

      There is a global axis of evil (thanks, W) all aligned with the singular goal of having DJT lose election.

      Ultimately,it boils down to the American populace - who will win, Jefferson's vision ( a republic, if you can keep it) or Orwell's.

      Charles Z

      Charles Z

    7. @ Ray

      "My gut is the GOP will sweep the house, senate, and Presidency."

      Fingers crossed.

    8. I'm with Ray, Mr. Wauck and Cassander.

      But, if we don't clear out the Cornyns, Blunts, Collinses, Murkowskis, Romneys, what's the point?

      Repeating the same behavior is the definition of insanity. At least that's the expression I see used.

      More of us need to call a spade a spade. We need to address our moral failings as a people. We've gotten away from God. We make idols out of the NFL, smart phones, TV, etc. There's a toxic war on God, men, white men, whites, reason and tradition.

    9. As usual, I posted a comment before reading all the comments ahead of mine.

      Charles Z nails it in his last paragraph.

      Mr. Wauck, I agree with you that there will be a backlash against the craziness. On the other hand, a lot of those voters who won't stand for the current situation, will go back to sleep once the election is over. Or, they will vote for the craziness when they tire of the people that they elect. In other words, they are reactive, rather than proactive.

    10. @Joe

      "We make idols out of the NFL, smart phones, TV, etc."

      Well...for a start...I'm trying to take your advice, Joe. I haven't watched an NFL game since 2016 (after watching a thousand of them in the previous 60+ years)...I've turned off voice mail and the ringer on my smart phone (if you want to reach me you'll have to catch me looking at my phone), and we haven't watched a program on network TV in years (as long as you don't count Fox News). :)

      So we're getting there!

    11. I leave on the voice mail and the ringer, but only answer calls, which caller-ID tells me are from numbers known to me.
      The scam robo-calls have spiked in recent years.
      I've not watched TV for c.5 years, except for Fox.

      Rather O/T, if Biden has any sense, he'll pick Rice for his Veep, unless he knows that Durham has her in his sights.
      She has "Nat. Security creds", and lacks the sort of baggage which haunts girls like Pocahontas.
      The beefs vs. her (so far) are mostly of the D.C. "inside baseball" variety.

  9. "the U.S. Supreme Court called a man a woman"

    Okay, so fathers/grandfathers waiting right outside the ladies room for their daughters need do so no longer. Go on in. After all, that mentally disturbed dude in heels and a dress just went in and there's no way in Hades that is going to be allowed in there alone with your little girl. I assume the ladies will be just fine with this. It's SCOTUS-approved.

  10. To paraphrase Daniel Horowitz, the SC is a super legislating body for 9 legislators with lifetime tenure.

  11. Charles Z. - Thanks!
    >what's next before the election?

    Great list and thought provoking.

    A few SWAG's, some much more likely than others.

    1. India & China - Both countries looking for distractions...

    2. Afghanistan / Iraq / Gulf - Iran would love to have massive US casualties, as long as they don't get push back. The taking out of Suleiman and the lack of US response on the drone downing, and Saudi attack puzzled Iran, and has made any action uncertain. And the Iranian's hate uncertainty.

    3. Venezuela - Iran is trying for an incident, but the US is ignoring the provocations.

    4. Hong Kong - Another Power Keg with the Chinese tightening their control. Beyond Economic, I don't see much happening.

    5. Another Impeachment by the House? Perhaps over the Covid 19 response, or use of the Military?

    6. Durham is a wild card.

    7. I wonder if the Democrats can do more with the Military?

    8. Investigation by NY into something Trump.

    9. Over charging of Minnesota cop, resulting in found not guilty, and more riots?

    10. Turkey in Libya. So far the US is ignoring what Turkey is doing.

    11. Major terrorist attack by Hezbollah from Lebanon into Israel? Resulting in Israeli retaliation, massive missiles from Lebanon, and a massive war breaks out devastating Lebanon? Or something similar from Gaza Strip? I don't think the Israelis would be dumb enough to annex any part of the West Bank right now.

    12. More protests against Whitehouse people in public and in their homes.

    13. Campaign using Trump's niece against him, with her new book. To portray him as heartless, money grubbing, etc.

    14. More CHAZ Type zones across the nation.

    15. More deplatforming of sites that don't follow the narrative.

    16. South China Seas - I don't see much China can do there.

    17. China ramps up anti Japanese campaign.

    18. Iran closes the straights of Hormuz. I doubt this, since the Iranians know this just helps the US with fracking.

    19. Use of lawfare to keep businesses from opening due to liability issues, wrecking the economy.

    20. 2nd Wave of Coronavirus.

    21. More cop killing

    22. Dems push repeal of Qualified Immunity via the house.

    23. More immigration caravans - I think Trump has made this not possible.

    24. More sob stories about dreamers.

    25. Attempts by China to wreck the economy in swing states, to help defeat Trump. I wonder what else China can do?

    26. Anthony Scaramucci, is part of some dark money PAC, to defeat Trump. This is suspicious.

    27. Attempt to use the International Court to declare Trump a war criminal, or show how rogue the US is.

    28. Going after advertisers of Trump supporters in the media. Tucker is an example.

    29. Going after any Trump supporter.

    30. Blaming Trump for rallies increasing Coronavirus.

    31. Other countries using the UN, etc. to lecture us about police brutality, BLM, etc.

    32. Blaming Trump for the Detroitization of Minneapolis.

  12. Ray:
    33. antiFa etc. stopping Durham, w/ mass action, e.g. by courthouse doors.
    34. Silicon Valley sabotaging economy via web freezing up, e.g. w/ super-viruses in IT gizmos.

  13. 35. - Impeachment of Barr. Looks like this will be attempted by Nadler, as a way to stymie Durham's release. Two of Mueller's team were given whistleblower protection.

    36. If the police walk off the jobs in Blue Cities due to horrible actions towards the police from the local Mayor, DA, etc. What will happen? Seems to be happening in Atlanta tonight. LA, Chicago, and NYC may be next.

    1. Ray, I like your list in general, but I can't help noticing there are no predictions for what will happen in Milwaukee.

  14. What seems to happen after a serious riot, is the place further deteriorates as anybody who can moves. And this reduces the tax base.

    Detroit, Baltimore, and Cleveland are examples of that. Most move quietly, due to fear of retribution / being accused of racism.

    And there is a huge increase in work from home, so central business districts will have less workers.

    I think you can already see some evidence of this in apartment rents, vacancy rates, and homes for sale.

    I see these as longer term trends, I’m worried what’s going to happen until the election is over. My gut feeling, I don’t see how, is things will get worse.

    >no predictions for what will happen in Milwaukee.

    1. My wife heard an interview with a realtor in Wyoming, who said she couldn't believe how busy she is.

    2. Also, generally, in this post-Covid (?) time, we're hearing that people have figured out that working from home is quite possible. Now they're moving their homes--far out.

  15. @Mark

    "My wife heard an interview with a realtor in Wyoming, who said she couldn't believe how busy she is."

    1. Fleeing to the hills with their guns and Bible. Bitter clingers all. :-)

    2. Actually, I'll bet they ARE armed to the teeth, but will mail in their ballots for Biden.