This has nothing to do with sex.
This is about parental rights.
People fail to understand that the States Attorney General possesses the parental right, under commerce, in this particular situation, trafficking tiny humans.
This is about chattel law because we are dealing with land, and children are attached to the land, which uncloaks another layer in the residuals of the peculiar institution.
For some, this is about human asset management.
One side wants degenderfication for investments, the other side wants to conserve their hierarchic human property ownership structure of chattels.
Children are attached to the land as immovable chattels, but the soul is the movable chattel, better understood as the birth certificate, the identity, the one thing necessary for billing to Medicaid.
If St. Vincent and Bethany Christian lose their ability to acquire goods, their institutions would not be eligible to meet their contractual obligations with DHS and ICE, in warehousing, transportation and distribution of all those border babies.
I bet "The Boys" over there at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops got The Saddy Faces right now because another federal judge has made another ruling, allowing the DOJ to file a Statement of Interest in a similar subject matter case.
This is about the children's trusts.
Justice Department Files Statement of Interest in Indiana Lawsuit Brought by Former Teacher Against Archdiocese
The Justice Department today filed a Statement of Interest explaining that the First Amendment protects the right of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Indianapolis to interpret and apply Catholic doctrine. The lawsuit was brought against the Archdiocese by a former teacher who was fired from a Catholic high school within the diocese because he was in a same-sex marriage in contradiction to Catholic teaching on marriage. The Archdiocese indicated that the school had to terminate the teacher, or the school would forfeit its Catholic identity, which would have led to several repercussions for the school.
“The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right of religious institutions and people to decide what their beliefs are, to teach their faith, and to associate with others who share their faith,” said Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband for the Civil Rights Division. “The First Amendment rightly protects the free exercise of religion.”
“If the First Amendment’s Religion Clauses stand for anything, it is that secular courts cannot entangle themselves in questions of religious law,” said United States Attorney Josh Minkler.
This case stems from a directive issued by the Archdiocese to Cathedral High School, a Catholic school in Indianapolis. The Archdiocese told Cathedral that the school’s continued employment of a teacher in a public, same-sex marriage in contradiction to Catholic teachings on marriage would result in Cathedral’s forfeiture of its Catholic identity. After much deliberation, the school terminated the teacher. The teacher then filed suit against the Archdiocese, claiming the directive to Cathedral interfered with his employment and his contractual relationship with the school.
The government explains in the Statement of Interest that the First Amendment prevents courts from impairing the constitutional rights of religious institutions. The former teacher’s lawsuit attempts to penalize the Archdiocese for determining that schools within its diocese cannot employ teachers in public, same-sex marriages, and simultaneously identify as Catholic. Supreme Court precedent clearly holds that the First Amendment protects the Archdiocese’s right to this form of expressive association, and courts cannot interfere with that right.
The Statement of Interest also makes clear that courts cannot second-guess how religious institutions interpret and apply their own religious laws. Supreme Court precedent explains that the First Amendment forbids courts from engaging in “quintessentially religious controversies.” Instead, as the Statement of Interest explains, “the legitimacy of the Archdiocese’s decision as a matter of Catholic law” is committed exclusively “to the judgment of the Archdiocese.”
In July 2018, the Department of Justice announced the formation of the Religious Liberty Task Force. The Task Force brings together Department components to coordinate their work on religious liberty litigation and policy, and to implement the Attorney General’s 2017 Religious Liberty Guidance.
DOJ Payne-Elliott - Statement of Interest in Indiana Lawsuit Brought by Former Teacher Against Illinois Ar... by Beverly Tran on Scribd
Here is another federal judge who had an issue with indefinite holding of children in state facilities.
Indentured servitude is traditionally contracted in seven year incrementswith 90 day dispositional cycles.
Dana is slated to be placed in a similar, strategic, legal position, as the DOJ has just done, if she just so happens to file an enjoinder with Statement of Interest in previous federal cases in dealing with the Brothers of St. Vincent and the Daughters of Charity, or something wily creative to that effect.
Robert Jonker is the judge who halted the rules, promulgated from the law.
 | ||
|
Federal judge halts Michigan's new gay adoption rulesRobert James Jonker (born March 9, 1960) is the Chief United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan.
Born in Holland, Michigan, Jonker received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Calvin College in 1982 and a Juris Doctor from the University of Michigan Law School in 1985. He was a law clerk for Judge John F. Feikens of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, from 1985 to 1987. He was in private practice in Grand Rapids, Michigan, from 1987 to 2007.
On March 19, 2007, Jonker was nominated by President George W. Bush to a seat on the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan vacated by Gordon Jay Quist. Jonker was confirmed by the United States Senate on July 9, 2007, and received his commission on July 16, 2007. He became Chief Judge in 2015.
Here is a bit of background on the christian legal battles of marriage.
Here is a fun little rubric to play with during the course of this uncloaking:
If two individuals are of the same "sex" (not broaching definitive legal measurement tools for the distinctions of phenotype and genotype), what is the citizenship of the adopted child?
Better yet, what is the race of the child, considering they like to lump and dump in crappy predictive modeling variables of race, since we still use race classifications, one of those pesky residuals of the peculiar institution.
It is called "Right of the Womb".
This is about the re-animation of the peculiar institution while battling for their stake in those economic redevelopment funds, because they are going broke from stealin' the children, land and votes.
Gerrymandering.
Federal judge halts Michigan's new gay adoption rules
A Grand Rapids federal judge has halted a new state policy that bans state contracts with foster and adoption agencies that refuse to work with gay couples.
The state’s settlement and comments made by Democratic Attorney General Dana Nessel about the policy prior to taking office show “that the state’s new position targets St. Vincent’s religious beliefs,” U.S. District Judge Robert Jonker wrote in his Thursday opinion.
The opinion comes none too soon for St. Vincent, whose contract for adoption services with the state expires on Monday.
 |
| Dana Nessel |
"If they cannot come to an agreement that allows for a quick process of the decommissioning of Line 5 then I will act," Attorney General Dana Nessel said in an interview on the sidelines of the Mackinac Policy Conference. "I'm not prepared to wait much longer on that." (Photo: Clarence Tabb Jr., The Detroit News)
In his opinion, Jonker said Nessel "is at the very heart of the case" in part because of comments she made on the campaign trail in which she described supporters of the state’s prior policy as “hate mongers” and said she “could not justify using the state’s money” to defend “a law whose only purpose is discriminatory animus.”
Shortly after taking office, Nessel agreed to change state policy so contracts with agencies that refused to work with gay couples would be terminated.
"All of this supports a strong inference that St. Vincent was targeted based on its religious belief, and that it was defendant Nessel who targeted it," wrote Jonker, an appointee of Republican President George W. Bush.
“Under the attorney general’s current interpretation of Michigan law and the parties’ contracts, St. Vincent must choose between its traditional religious belief, and the privilege of continuing to place children with foster and adoptive parents of all types," Jonker wrote.
Nessel tweeted late Thursday in response to the development: "Now and forever I will fight to support the constitutional precepts of separation of church and state and equal protection under the law for all Michigan residents and all Americans."
The lawsuit filed on behalf of St. Vincent, an adoptive mother and a former foster child revolves around a March settlement between Nessel and the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan regarding two gay couples who had sued the state when they were rejected by agencies with religious objections to same-sex couples. The agencies were St. Vincent and Bethany Christian Services.
The judge's opinion failed to note that some of those comments were made by Nessel in her capacity as a private citizen and others were taken out of context, said Jay Kaplan, a staff attorney for the ACLU of Michigan.
Jonker's decision to issue a preliminary injunction was disappointing and appeared to ignore counter arguments made by the state and the ACLU in amicus briefings, he said.
Adoption agencies essentially become state actors when they contract with the state and allowing them to invoke religious reasons for failing to serve a group of people is akin to a "violation of church and state," he said. The decision essentially "provides a license for discrimination," Kaplan said.
"The ones who lose as a result of this are the children, the children who need these loving, stable homes," Kaplan said.
A spokeswoman for Nessel's office said the department is reviewing the decision. The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services referred comment to the attorney general's office.
The settlement required the state Department of Health and Human Services to maintain non-discriminatory provisions in foster care and adoption agency contracts by ending state contracts with agencies if they discriminate against same-sex couples.
In its April filing, St. Vincent argued the new policy violated the group’s First Amendment rights to free exercise of religion and free speech, the group's 14th Amendment rights to equal protection and those rights guaranteed under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
The agency is represented by a religious liberty group, Becket Law.
The judge's ruling Thursday shows "discriminatory actions taken by the state in this case really have no role in the foster care and adoption context," Reaves said. "And when the state takes these actions, it actually makes it harder to find a home for kids in need.”
The case revolves not around whether same-sex couples can be great parents, Jonker wrote, but around “whether St. Vincent may continue to do this work and still profess and promote the traditional Catholic belief that marriage as ordained by God is for one man and one woman.”
Without state contacts, St. Vincent would be forced to close its doors, the agency argued. Further, other adoption agencies are available to gay couples seeking a child.
As of mid-February, St. Vincent and Bethany were responsible for nearly 10% of the more than 13,000 children under state supervision.
Agencies already can refer couples to different adoption agencies for various reasons, including geography, waitlists or a family's search for a specific type of child. But under the new policy, "the only justification for a referral that is now impermissible is a religious objection to same-sex marriage," the lawsuit said.
In the past, St. Vincent had referred gay couples to other adoption agencies because it believes an evaluation recommending the couples for state licensure “would conflict with (its) religious beliefs.”
The state has investigated St. Vincent for compliance with the new policy but "were waiting for the lawsuit to play out before they take the next step," Reaves said. The rulingfurther prevents the state from acting on the new policy during the duration of the case, he said.
The Legislature in 2015 passed a law that protected faith-based agencies that declined to provide services based on religion. Nessel’s office argued the law applied only to “private action” and not to “state-contracted services.”
Republican former Attorney General Bill Schuette had defended the state against the ACLU lawsuit when it was filed in 2017, but Nessel’s office sought a settlement instead.
The Michigan Catholic Conference, a lead advocate for the 2015 law, praised the judge's Thursday decision, saying: "it's encouraging to see that Dana Nessel's animosity toward Catholics has now been recognized in federal court."
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
No comments:
Post a Comment