SPONSORED:

Plaintiff and defendant from Obergefell v. Hodges unite to oppose Barrett's confirmation

Both namesakes of Obergefell v. Hodges, the landmark 2015 Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage, are opposing the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney BarrettAmy Coney BarrettGraham reports 'record-breaking' 9M haul during 2020 campaign The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Mastercard - Dem leaders back smaller COVID-19 relief bill as pandemic escalates Supreme Court sees new requests for religious COVID-19 carve-outs MORE to the court Tuesday.

“We ask the Senate to vote no on this nomination,” Jim Obergefell, who was the plaintiff in the case, said in a livestreamed press conference on Tuesday. “Judge Barrett's well-known stances on marriage equality, trans equality and other issues represent a serious risk to our civil rights and our ability to form and protect our families.”

Rick Hodges, who represented the Ohio Department of Health in the case, said Barrett’s confirmation could jeopardize “all Americans [being] treated with full dignity and respect regardless of who they are or whom they love” and benefiting “equally and fully from government services.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“I can't stress enough how important I believe it is that the two opposing sides of such a momentous ruling can stand together as friends and defend the LGBTQ+ communities,” Obergefell said.

The two were joined by Democratic Sens. Sherrod BrownSherrod Campbell BrownACLU sues DHS for records on purchased cell phone data to track immigrants DHS watchdog to probe agency's tracking of Americans' phone data without a warrant Rare Mnuchin-Powell spat takes center stage at COVID-19 hearing MORE (Ohio), Patty MurrayPatricia (Patty) Lynn MurrayCriminal justice groups offer support for Durbin amid fight for Judiciary spot National reading, math tests postponed to 2022 amid coronavirus surge Democratic anger rises over Trump obstacles to Biden transition MORE (Wash.) and Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenHillicon Valley: Government used Patriot Act to gather website visitor logs in 2019 | Defense bill leaves out Section 230 repeal, includes White House cyber czar position | Officials warn hackers are targeting vaccine supply chain Government used Patriot Act to gather website visitor logs in 2019 Despite veto threat, Congress presses ahead on defense bill MORE (Ore.).

The press conference, which was organized by LGBTQ rights organization Family Equality, comes amid concerns that a 6-3 conservative majority on the high court could put LGBTQ rights at risk.

Two of the dissenters in Obergefell v. Hodges, Justices Clarence ThomasClarence ThomasFor Thanksgiving, the Supreme Court upholds religious liberty Defusing the judicial confirmation process Will the Supreme Court take ObamaCare off life-support? MORE and Samuel AlitoSamuel AlitoConservative justices seem prepared to let Trump proceed with immigrant census plan for now For Thanksgiving, the Supreme Court upholds religious liberty Alito to far-right litigants: The buffet is open MORE, criticized the ruling earlier this month in another dissent after the court allowed a lawsuit against former Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis to proceed. Two gay couples are suing Davis for refusing to issue marriage licenses to them in 2015.

In the same conference, Brown expressed openness to expanding the Supreme Court, a strategy many on the left support. Democratic presidential nominee Joe BidenJoe BidenAppeals court OKs White House diverting military funding to border wall construction Federal student loan payment suspension extended another month Pentagon: Tentative meeting between spy agencies, Biden transition set for early next week MORE has previously said he is “not a fan” of the idea.

“Depending on what happens — what happens to the [Affordable Care Act], what happens to Roe v. Wade, what happens to marriage equality — all things are on the table,” Brown said.