Considering LGBTQ+ is a protected group in the USA, surely the Speaker of the House Mike Johnson’s comments are tantamount to criminal harassment if not hate motivated harassment.
We don’t have hate crimes. That’s not a concept that exists legally. As for harrassment, I don’t think it’d stand in court, and good luck suing the Speaker of the House
Considering LGBTQ+ is a protected group in the USA
[citation needed]
As far as I understand, the US “Equality Act” fizzled out the last time it tried to make its way through the US parliament. That would codify LGBTQ+ protections into actual law in the US. The closest thing I can find is a Supreme Court ruling that LGBTQ protections are covered under the Civil Rights Act in Bostock v. Clayton County, but the Supreme Court is a fickle beast, and I doubt they would rule the same way today if it were challenged again.
Considering LGBTQ+ is a protected group in the USA, surely the Speaker of the House Mike Johnson’s comments are tantamount to criminal harassment if not hate motivated harassment.
We don’t have hate crimes. That’s not a concept that exists legally. As for harrassment, I don’t think it’d stand in court, and good luck suing the Speaker of the House
https://www.justice.gov/hatecrimes/learn-about-hate-crimes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Shepard_and_James_Byrd_Jr._Hate_Crimes_Prevention_Act
[citation needed]
As far as I understand, the US “Equality Act” fizzled out the last time it tried to make its way through the US parliament. That would codify LGBTQ+ protections into actual law in the US. The closest thing I can find is a Supreme Court ruling that LGBTQ protections are covered under the Civil Rights Act in Bostock v. Clayton County, but the Supreme Court is a fickle beast, and I doubt they would rule the same way today if it were challenged again.