At a visit to a high school in Virginia, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli answered several questions from students. One in particular struck me because it shows, how Cuccinelli understands the 14th Amendment.
According to a report on newsadvance.com, one student asked: “I’m sure you are aware of a letter that was sent to state universities regarding discrimination policies based on sexual orientation. How is that not a violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment?”.
The Attorney General said in response, that “[...] the category of sexual orientation would never have been contemplated by the people who wrote and voted for and passed the 14th Amendment.”
When I first read this, something Shakespeare wrote in his Merchant of Venice came to mind. He was clearly ahead of his time and as we see in the case of Cuccinelli, racism won’t cease to exist any time soon.
Obviously Cuccinelli’s statement is not racist, but it still encourages discrimination.
The 14th Amendment, which grants every citizen equal protection under the law, does not protect from sexual discrimination, according to the Attorney General. He does not provide any evidence to support his claims, but merely says that back in the day this was no issue and therefore should be excluded.
14th Amendment: |
---|
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. |
Taking a look at the exact wording makes clear, that there is no exception to the law for people with different sexual orientation or any other difference from the mainstream for that matter.
The Supreme Court also interpreted the 14th Amendment in a way, that evey law disrespecting the equality of the citizens is unconstitutional. Like the case Shaw v. Reno in 1993.
I suspect, that he just wants to spread his ideology, no matter what the constitution actually says. This misinterpretation should cost him his job, because using the 14th Amendment and spin its meaning as he pleases is despicable.