/ACLU suit equates “religious freedom” law to Jim Crow legislation

ACLU suit equates “religious freedom” law to Jim Crow legislation

The ACLU accuses that the law’s passage, which is reminiscent of Civil Rights litigation, effectively segregates gays and lesbians from the rest of the population. The suit claims that even though the law won’t be in effect until July 1, it stigmatizes these groups by its mere existence. Todd Allen, the ACLU’s advocacy coordinator, said that it’s similar to Jim Crow. “It’s like Jim Crow. Every law that designs someone as ‘others’ hurts them.” “You don’t need to prove that water from the ‘black’s only’ fountain was dirty. “The harm is the stigma that you have because they are separate fountains.” The suit also requests a preliminary injunction to stop the law’s implementation in July. Daniel Jordan is the district judge in the case. He lifted the ban on same-sex adoptions from the state last month. Gov. Bryant signed the “Religious Freedom Law” last month. It protects three religious beliefs that the state considers important: one man and one lady are married; people shouldn’t have sex with anyone else; and that a person is born gendered. Anyone who rejects the services of gays, lesbians, or transgender people because they believe in these beliefs is protected from lawsuits. Governor. Phil Bryant expressed frustration at the growing challenges to “religious freedom law”. “The ACLU will continue its mission to use federal courts to advance its liberal agenda. The ACLU should not pick causes that are popular with the radical left and instead allocate resources to defending civil liberties.” Gov. Bryant made a statement. Judy Moulder is named as the defendant in the lawsuit by the complaint. House Bill 1523 provides that the state registrar will maintain a list of all county clerks who refuse to issue a marriage license for a gay or lesbian couple. These individuals are exempt from prosecution. “A ‘no similar-sex couples allowed’ list causes constitutional injury to Plaintiffs, ACLU of Mississippi members and other same-sex couple even though the recusals don’t impede or delay them from obtaining marriage licenses. The lawsuit states that creating a separate, unequal set of laws for same-sex couples creates a disadvantage and a stigma on all married same-sex couple. The ACLU filed the suit on behalf of Nykolas and Stephen Thomas, a married gay couple from Meridian. Alford stated that the law made them feel second-class citizens. Alford stated that we are an example of the discrimination and harm this law would cause LGBT people in Mississippi. This is nothing but a thinly disguised attempt to discriminate towards already marginalized groups within our society, and which as such is completely un-American.” Jennifer Riley-Collins is the executive director of ACLU of Mississippi. She stated that the ACLU and its associates planned to challenge the law “from all angles.” The ACLU’s challenge of Mississippi’s “religious freedom law stems from Obergefell, a ruling last summer in which the Supreme Court approved gay marriage across the country using the equal protection and due process clauses of the Fourteenth Amendments. Obergefell was a clear statement by the Supreme Court that states must offer equal legal treatment for couples that are married to same sex as they do for other couples. Riley-Collins stated that HB 1523 treats marriages between same sex couples in a different way than other marriages. The complaint doesn’t explicitly refer to civil rights litigation, but it uses the language of the era multiple times, using the phrase “separate” to describe HB1523. Oliver Diaz, Jackson’s attorney, saw a direct connection between the two. Diaz stated that he was offended by having to watch the Mississippi legislature pass a bill and the governor of Mississippi adopt a bill instituting state-sponsored discrimination in Mississippi. “We have a long history of Mississippi bigotry, discrimination, and House Bill 1523 puts that back to life.” Diaz said. The attorney general’s office, which will be representing Moulder in the suit, refused to comment until the copy of the lawsuit had been served. To support this work, make a regular donation to us today as we celebrate our Spring Member Drive.