economically. focusing on the economic benefits and the economic entitlements that people should be focused on. you mentioned the supreme court decision, the supreme court decisions are certainly a huge blow to many people. but i see them as a wake up call. all of the recent rulings against gay rights, against affirmative action, against the right to choose, against student loan relief show that we have an activist supreme court that s really intent on stripping all of us of our fundamental american rights. so yes, i m an lgbtq activist, but i m also a black man. and all of these decisions are really stripping away fundamental principles that the court said were deeply embedded in our history and tradition. this is the 14th amendment. i ve been practicing law for 20 years, i went to law school reading these cases. and now these cases, there are new cases that are saying the pillars that we have been relying on constitutionally no
true, extreme activist court to roll back a key protection against discriminating our community, is shameful. i think this is a very dark day for our community. congressman, you were one of 13 members of congress out of 535 who are openly members of the lgbtq+ community according to pew research center, and you ve talked about how your community feels under attack. what are you and your colleagues doing to prioritize lgbtq rights, especially given today s decision? i mean, i think a couple of things. first, we ve got to be crystal clear about what happened. we have an activist supreme court installed by donald trump and mitch mcconnell, when we elect extremists like donald trump to the presidency, we are going to get extremist courts. the very first thing that we need to do is ensure that we continue to push and ensure that we elect people that are going to elect fair courts. that are going to push forward.
my brain. so i choose neuriva plus. unlike some others, neuriva plus is a multitasker supporting 6 key indicators of brain health. to help keep me sharp. neuriva: think bigger. get directv with a two year price guarantee. if you live in a state where abortion is legal and think hearsay from the activist supreme court and the radical antiabortion agenda, think again. walgreens confirmed that it would not sell abortion pills in several states, including states where abortion is legal, after seed letters from 20 republican attorneys general threatening legal action against the company.
unsolvable in the present because they were not solved in the past. gun violence is just one example of a crisis that is getting worse while the court is loosening regulations on guns. how can the courts ignore this ? it s really troubling and problematic. they are basically using this theory of constitutional interpretation, originalism, as an out to just do what they would ve wanted to do anyway. and secure their preferred policy goals rather than actually interpreting the constitution in a way that makes sense and protects all of americas residents equally. the next question i was going to ask you was, originalism was just justice sullied owes reason for overturning roe v. wade, a justice thomas going after contraception and gay rights using the same interpretation.
jonathan, the rationale behind this that they re saying is that it s not safe to have a polling place on a college campus. but they also forced through, allowing folks to carry firearms on a college campus. so which one is about safety? we know when it s not about. that it s about suppressing the vote. i have to say, that we have talked a lot about efforts to overturn elections after the election is over in how under democratic that is. we have to pay more attention in this country to what they re doing before the election to fix the results were to try to make sure that certain folks don t have a chance to vote madeleine. that actually dovetails nicely with follow-up question i have, and that is, are you worried we are taking our eye off the ball to voter suppression efforts in the states. i think that we are in a difficult moment because we have a supreme court that is hostile to voting. as a voting rights lawyer that