Texas

GOP Senator Raised by Supreme Court Claiming NOT to Legalize Racial Marriage

A Republican senator from Indiana is on fire after telling reporters that the 1967 Supreme Court ruling ruled that the law overturning laws banning interracial marriage was wrong and that the decision should be left to the states.

Senator Mike Braun, 67, made controversial statements in a media call Tuesday.

Braun was asked if the Supreme Court agreed to the repeal of hypothetical landmarks such as Loving vs. Virginia, which banned racial marriage in violation of the 14th Amendment.

“Yes,” he replied. “If you don’t want the Supreme Court to measure up on issues like this, you can’t even take your cake and eat it. “She’s a hypocrite,” said Braun.

When the reporter hit it again, and Griswold vs. In Connecticut, the 1956 SCOTUS ruling allowed married couples to use contraceptives against Griswold vs. Griswold.

Braun said: “You can list a lot of problems, wherever they are, I will tell you that they will not make you happy in any given situation.

“But it’s better for states to show their perspective on homogenizing the whole country like Roe vs. Wade did.”

Indian GOP Senator Mike Braun told reporters that the Supreme Court’s 1967 ruling overturning a law banning interracial marriage was wrong and that the decision should be left to the states.

“In terms of problems, you can’t be in two ways. When you want this diversity to shine in our federal system, there will be rules and procedures that may be in sync with what other states would do.

“That’s the beauty of the system. And that is where the differences in the views of our 50 states should be pointed out. And I’m not saying that this rule would apply in general, depending on the topic, but most of the time it should be in general, because it’s hard to be on topics that interest you when you deny them to others. point of view. ‘

Braun reacted angrily to the comments of many who called him racist

Indiana Democratic Party President Mike Schmuhl warned that the statement was an endorsement of the “dangerous views of white patriots.”

“Mike Braun’s words and opinions are not only American, but under the respect of respectable people who want to hold public office,” Schmuhl said.

“The Supreme Court of the United States has repeatedly held that marriage equality in our country extends to any engaged couple, regardless of gender, race, orientation, or religious affiliation, and that legitimacy calls into question the very fabric of America and its people.”

Her comments sparked outrage on social media, with users questioning why she was asked about the topic of interracial marriage.

«1850. I fell in? When did the legitimacy of interracial marriage become the right issue? ” Alan Winnikoff tweeted.

“So they come not only to same-sex marriage, but also to interracial marriage? So who are the marriages with? Or will they ask for permission depending on the state in which they live? ‘ was written by another angry user.

Braun tried unsuccessfully to move away from his questionable position a few hours after the conference call, although he repeated it several times during the conversation, believing that fundamental rights issues such as interracial marriage and abortion should be left to the states.

“I misunderstood a line of questions about interracial marriage in a virtual press conference earlier, let me make that clear …” she said in a statement, Slate reported.

“There is no doubt that the Constitution prohibits racial discrimination of any kind, which is not something to be discussed, and I condemn racism in any format, at any level and in any state, entity or individual.”

In the call, Braun said that in order for diversity to “shine in our federal system,” rules and procedures had to be synchronized, and that was the “beauty of the system.”

“And I’m not saying that this rule would apply in general, depending on the subject, but most of the time it should be in general, because it’s hard to be that simple … when you deny it to others in matters that interest you. with a different perspective, ”Braun said.

Braun, who has been in office since 2019, has also previously shared comments against trans.

“Girls’ sports should be for girls, and allowing biological men to compete with them deprives female athletes of the chance to compete and win, ”Braun said Monday.

“I am disappointed that Governor Holcomb vetoed a bill to make this law in Indiana, and I support the repeal of the veto to protect women’s athletics.”

Loving Vs. Virginia: The 1967 SCOTUS ruling unanimously banned laws banning interracial marriage

When Mildred Loving, a black woman banned from a rural Virginia town for marrying a white man in 1963, wrote to U.S. Attorney General Bobby Kennedy, she never imagined that she would change the course of American history.

Kennedy referred the case of Mildred and Richard Loving to the U.S. Civil Liberties Union, and in 1967, forcing the couple into exile from Virginia and breaking state anti-disorder laws for eleven years, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned legislation banning interracial marriage.

Nearly 50 years after the landmark verdict, Lovings’ quiet working class is shown in US theaters on Friday in ‘Loving’.

There are people who fight for something they believe in behind every cause, and in this case, it was Lovings ’constant devotion to each other that inspired writer and director Jeff Nichols.

“We stop thinking about the humanity at the center of these things, and that’s what Richard and Mildred show us,” he said.

In “Loving,” the Caroline County (Virginia) couple travels to Washington to get married, ignoring strict Virginia laws that prevent interracial marriage.

They return to their home to live quietly under the radar, but report it to the police and Lovings, who is expecting their first child, will be arrested and sentenced to prison on the condition that they leave Virginia.

The film focuses on the quiet daily life of Lovings, with little conversation between the couple, but the discomfort of living in tight neighborhoods in a noisy big city and the desire to return to Virginia are the catalyst for their case.

Lovings “weren’t shouting and cheering on the podium. They were somehow pushed through a door that was literally open; they weren’t getting into that,” said Joel Edgerton, who plays Richard Loving.

“They are very identifiable, heroes who don’t want to,” he added.

The Loving vs. Virginia case was mentioned in arguments for same-sex marriage, which became legal in the United States in 2015.

“They changed the legislative nature of the judiciary, they changed the American constitution, they paved the way for the lives of many people,” said Ruth Negga, who plays Mildred Loving.

“I don’t think anyone should ever think that their voice is too small or too calm, because it shows that this couple is just the opposite,” he added.

GOP Senator Raised by Supreme Court Claiming NOT to Legalize Racial Marriage

Source link GOP Senator Raised by Supreme Court Claiming NOT to Legalize Racial Marriage

Back to top button