Maybe Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II is just misunderstood. It’s not that he wants homosexuals at state colleges to be stripped of their discrimination protections. It’s that in order to offer those protections, these institutions of higher education need the okay from state lawmakers first — the same state lawmakers who year-after-year refuse to add sexual orientation to the state’s list of protected classes.
When Cuccinelli (pictured) issued his letter to state university administrators, he was merely giving his “legal advice.” And he’s standing behind it: “What I said in my March 4 letter was accurate advice under Virginia law, and it still stands. [The schools] don’t have any more authority than the General Assembly gives them, which is a similar position as the localities. And until the General Assembly gives them more authority, they’re quarantined by what they’ve got.”
So there are two possibilities here: Cuccinelli is correct, and the General Assembly needs to add protections in order for colleges to issue them in accordance with the law; or he is wrong, and colleges are free to protect LGBT employees as they see fit, the same way they are free to let student groups protest in the quad and Spanish 101 classes convene. Either way, perhaps this is a teaching moment: The Assembly needs to add LGBT protections to the state books, so these issues never come up again, and Virginians are protected on all fronts.
And with Gov. Bob McDonnell issuing his own directive that contradicts Cuccinelli, surely we can count on the Republican governor to lead the fight?
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Most notable, however, is that Cuccinelli agrees with McDonnell’s conclusion that LGBT discrimination is unconstitutional. And we’re no legal experts here, but if something is unconstitutional, isn’t a university — and any government body — automatically barred from doing it?
bystander
Unconstitutional
There are three t’s
rf
In order for sexual orientation to be viably protected from discrimination you need a law (that’s deemed constitutional) or a high court ruling (which often manifests itself into a law). Cockinelli is of course correct that the colleges have no legal standing in protecting employees from SO discrimination– there’s no law (state or federal) and there’s no court ruling.
He is also right that sexual orientation discrimination is unconstitutional. Just like banning lgbt from the right to marry the person of their choosing is unconstitutional. Great in theory but what’s the recourse when it happens? Without the law or court ruling, there is no agency or mediator or government office that has to help someone fired for SO discrimination. They’d have to launch a lawsuit and deal with many of the issues prop 8 trial is going through now and without suspect classification for SO the burden of proof is largely on the fired employee. If it were so easy to protect lgbt by just claiming SO discrim is unconstitutional we wouldn’t need laws like the civil rights act of 1964 or ENDA.
The real takeaway from this is that both of these kooks have now gone on record saying that SO discrim is unconstitutional. That could be potential fuel during a SO discrim case to get suspect class for us. Stupid Virginia will be forever known as the villain in Loving. maybe they can do it again.
Daniel
It is fascinating so many gay men get married to women to pursue political careers, especially in conservative states.
Huh
Where on earth did you get the idea that Cuccinelli thinks discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is unconstitutional????
Huh
To clarify, his statement is being misinterpreted. He’s saying that rational basis scrutiny applies, which is the same level of scrutiny which applies to discrimination against people with red hair, purple t-shirts, or funny accents.
SAying rational basis scrutiny applies does not mean that all discrimination based on sexual orientation is always unconstitutional. For example, Dont Ask Dont Tell, and bans on gay adoption and gay marriage have all been upheld under rational basis scrutiny.
damon459
Odd in Montana we have no protection at the state level yet the state colleges we do and the university offers domestic partnership benefits and our state supreme court agreed on that one.
Katie Murphy
@Daniel:
you need to order the movie “Outrage” from amazon. It exposes a whole host of anti-gay politicians, most but not all republicans, who are secretly gay.
They so hate themselves, and they try to hide who they are by throwing their hatred on other good gay people.
They also marry, try to hide who they are, and then have miserable marriages, and secretly hook up with other guys, or get divorced and remarried ad infinitum in a desperate attempt to find the solution to their same sex love.
And I know one of these people. He talked about being schizophrenic as a youngster, hearing voices, etc. And had a Psych tell him he was a repressed Homosexual. And you haven’t heard anything until you challenge his beliefs. This ultra Catholic said to me “Matthew Sheppard’s Parents should have “fixed him” – blaming the parents for Matthew’s murder and justifying it at the same time – (remember he was the small college student beaten to death in Wyoming by a couple of catholic boys who needed to have a little fun with a gay kid). And then that baptist maniac of the Westboro baptist church celebrated at his funeral with pictures of him burnng in hell.
But what is really wrong with bill? He perfectly fits the model of someone who was abused as a boy by his priest. And in a desperate attempt to save his soul, he throws out the self hatred he has, that his criminal priest gave him, blaming him as a boy, for being the cause of the priest raping him.
BTW, The WBC guy – Fred Phelps – his couple sons who have left his mad group 30 years ago, said that Phelps was beaten by his alcoholic father with an ax handle. And Phelps did the same to his kids and worse. The old rule about abused become the new abusers is a truism in Psychology. And that is how the church creates so many gay haters, btw.
Cass
Hi. I’m one of the college kids (also a state employee! what fun!) affected by this story.
The college matter isn’t settled because McDonnell’s executive “directive” didn’t say anything. His executive order, which removed protections for sexual orientation and gender discrimination, still stands. (In Virginia, an executive order has the force of law, while an executive directive is just…a letter.)
My friend Casey and I have prepared two documents on this issue. One is in layman’s terms, and pretty much a humorous take on the issue: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqsMBPhVUsU
The other is a legal analysis of the issue: https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AWHlJqPuBrJ4ZGN2NGM3NjlfMjJkcms2azc4Yg&hl=en
Feel free to read both. We’re really trying to get the word out that Governor McDonnell has NOT stood up for LGBT persons in Virginia, but is instead trying to look politically “moderate” while still upholding his discriminatory policy.