Connect with us

Congress

Democratic leaders urged to restrict Supreme Court jurisdiction over marriage, abortion

Roe v. Wade overturned last month

Published

4 years ago

on

Outside the U.S. Supreme Court on June 24, 2022, after it overturned Roe v. Wade. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

In a letter to Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill, 10 Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives asked for support in establishing and protecting nationwide privacy rights that include abortion and marriage equality. 

The letter, addressed to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), calls on party leaders to support a push to restrict the U.S. Supreme Court’s jurisdiction over matters and decisions regarding certain privacy-related rights.

“We write to urge your support for restricting the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction in the areas of abortion, marriage equality, non-procreative intimacy and contraception,” the members of Congress wrote. “In doing so, we can ensure that, as Congress takes legislative action to codify each of these fundamental rights, a radical, restless and newly constituted majority on the court cannot further undermine the protections we would enact.”

Although Congress cannot remove the Supreme Court from cases falling under its original jurisdiction, Article III of the Constitution does grant Congress the power to strip the court’s jurisdiction in appellate cases. 

Appellate jurisdiction pertains to a court hearing, reversing or amending a lower court’s previous decision on a case.

The signatories of the letter to Democratic leadership pointed to instances in which the Supreme Court itself has reaffirmed such congressional power in the past.

“Most recently, in Patchak v. Zinke (2018), Justice Thomas held for the court that, ‘When Congress strips federal courts of jurisdiction, it exercises a valid legislative power no less than when it lays taxes, coins money, declares war, or invokes any other power that the Constitution grants it,” they wrote. “‘Indeed, this court has held that Congress generally does not violate Article III when it strips federal jurisdiction over a class of cases.’”

The letter comes amid a new era of heightened tension between the Supreme Court and a number of members of Congress who have accused it of threatening the rights of certain groups of Americans after ruling on several controversial cases heard during its latest term.

In relaying what they feel to be the urgency of enacting such restrictions, the letter’s signatories pointed to the Supreme Court’s decision last month in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that ended the nationwide right to abortion. More privacy-related rights, they say, are now under threat.

“As a result of the Supreme Court’s actions, millions of people will no longer have access to abortion care, a crisis disproportionately impacting women, people of color, LGBTQIA+ people, and the undocumented,” the signatories wrote. “Moreover, Justice Thomas’ concurrence in Dobbs laid out a clear plan for the Supreme Court to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), Lawrence v. Texas (2003), and Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) in the near future, placing the rights to marriage equality, non-procreative intimacy and contraception in jeopardy.”

The letter was signed by U.S. Reps. Mondaire Jones (D-N.Y.), Marie Newman (D-Ill.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Cori Bush (D-Mo.), Mark Takano (D-Calif.) and Kaiali’i Kahele (D-Hawaii).

Related Topics:
Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Congress

HRC president campaigns for Chris Pappas in NH

Gay congressman running to succeed retiring U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen

Published

3 days ago

on

August 31, 2026

By

Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson, left, campaigns with U.S. Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.) in Manchester, N.H., on Aug. 30, 2026. (Photo courtesy of the Human Rights Campaign)

Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson on Sunday campaigned for U.S. Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.) in New Hampshire.

Robinson traveled to Manchester, the state’s largest city, nine days before the Sept. 8 primary that will determine who will vie for retiring U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)’s seat.

Former U.S. Sen. John E. Sununu, who represented New Hampshire in the U.S. Senate from 2003-2009, will face off against former U.S. Sen. Scott Brown, who represented Massachusetts in the U.S. Senate from 2010-2013, in the Republican primary.

Karishma Manzur is among the Democrats challenging Pappas.

A poll the University of New Hampshire Survey Center released on Aug. 26 shows Sununu is ahead of Brown. The same survey shows Pappas ahead of Manzur and his other Democratic challengers.

The UNH Survey Center poll shows Sununu ahead of Pappas by a 45-43 percent margin if they were to face off in the general election. The margin of error is +/-2.1 percent.

Pappas would become the first openly gay man elected to the U.S. Senate if he were to win in November.

Continue Reading

Congress

Chris Van Hollen says the Democratic Party needs change. Is he the one to lead it?

Senator is backing anti-establishment Democrats across the country

Published

1 week ago

on

August 26, 2026

By

By LEE O. SANDERLIN | The Democratic Party is having something of an identity crisis — losing to President Donald Trump twice in three elections will do that.

Should the party embrace anti-establishment figures who espouse progressive policy ideas like Medicare for all and rhetoric about unrigging the economy for the 1 percent? Or should Democrats try to appeal to moderates who want to return to semi-normalcy in a time of political upheaval?

Although he’s been in Congress since 2002, with key leadership roles throughout his tenure, Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen, 67, counts himself firmly in the anti-establishment camp.

The rest of this article can be found on the Baltimore Banner’s website.

Continue Reading

Congress

House blocks effort to codify transgender servicemember ban into law

Lawmakers approved two anti-trans NDAA amendments

Published

1 month ago

on

July 22, 2026

By

The Pentagon (Photo by icholakov/Bigstock)

The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday rejected an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would have codified a ban transgender servicemembers in the military.

The bipartisan vote was 212-217.

The NDAA is for the 2027 fiscal year and sets policies for the Defense Department programs and activities and the national security programs of the Department of Energy.

U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) proposed the amendment on July 21. It stated that all personnel are required to serve in accordance with their biological sex, citing military readiness and discipline.

Human Rights Campaign Senior Director of Government Affairs Jennifer Pike Bailey stated that she is grateful for the bipartisan vote that rejected President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s “dangerous and discriminatory policy that has kicked brave transgender servicemembers out of the military and weakened our national security.”

“Everyone who meets the same rigorous standards should be able to serve their country. We should honor that patriotism, particularly in this moment where we are witnessing brave servicemembers making the ultimate sacrifice for our country, instead of ending their careers and politicizing their existence. We’re grateful that a permanent extension of this ban failed, and we will keep fighting to reverse this senseless policy,” Bailey said.

Mark Takano, chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, stated that he and his members put in countless hours of work to kill the amendment.

“When Americans know they or their families are going to be targeted by or not supported by the military, that leads them to avoid signing up to serve or staying in the service — making it harder to keep the ranks of the armed services full and our nation safe. My colleagues in the Equality Caucus and I will continue working to prevent these attacks on our servicemembers and their families from becoming law,” Takano said.

According to the Congressional Equality Caucus, two other bills could potentially be passed that would also target the transgender community, both of which were proposed by U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.).

The first was a bill that would have prohibited gender-related medical care under TRICARE and to prevent TRICARE from covering certain gender-related medical procedures and treatments, which was approved in a vote of 219-208.

The second was a bill that would have prohibited male participation in female sports at DoDEA schools. DoDEA schools are Department of Defense Dependents Schools, which is a network of primary and secondary schools.

The amendment was approved in a vote of 221-203. 

Continue Reading

Popular