In welcoming the US Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock vs Clayton County (“Striking a blow for LGBT+ rights”, Opinion, June 20), Mary Bonauto mentions that the ruling was on a majority of 6-3, but does not engage with the reservations of the dissenting justices.
Justices Alito and Thomas argued that the court had crossed the line from interpreting legislation to legislating, and highlighted numerous disturbing consequences to which the decision might lead. Justice Kavanaugh argued that the court had usurped the role of Congress, and would deepen cynicism about judges’ supposed impartiality. Inevitably employers and insurers will play safe, widening the effect of the ruling. Even Justice Gorsuch has recognised that it will give rise to “questions for future cases”.
These are serious issues. It makes little sense to worry over foreign interference in US elections if the role of the supreme legislative authority is in fact exercised by unelected judges.
David J Critchley
Buckingham, Bucks, UK