In a move that will surprise gay activists and liberals, a spokesperson for Focus on the Family, a top religious right group, tells me that his organization has no problem with GOP Senator Jeff Sessions‘ claim today that he’s open to a Supreme Court nominee with “gay tendencies.”
The spokesperson confirms the group won’t oppose a gay SCOTUS nominee over sexual orientation.
“We agree with Senator Sessions,” Bruce Hausknecht, a spokesperson for Focus on the Family, which was founded by top religious right figure James Dobson, told me a few minutes ago. “The issue is not their sexual orientation. It’s whether they are a good judge or not.”
Their sexual orientation “should never come up,” he continued. “It’s not even pertinent to the equation.”
Gay activists had expected that the group would oppose an openly gay nominee, since the group has been an outspoken foe of gay marriage and has worked to convert gays to heterosexuality.
In an interview on MSNBC this morning, Sessions, the key Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said: “I don’t think a person who acknowledges that they have gay tendencies is disqualified per se for the job.”
“We need to be looking for a person that can gain full respect of the American people, who can apply the law fairly, when they put on that robe will be non-partisan and non-biased, no promoting any agenda, personal, religious, or moral, and follow the law faithfully,” Sessions continued.
“Our concern at the Supreme Court is judicial philosophy,” FOF spokesperson Hausknecht continued. “Sexual orientation only becomes an issue if it effects their judging.” For example, he said, “If someone says, `I don’t care what the law says, on the next case involving sexual orientation, I’m going to decide the case in favor of the openly gay party,’ that would be a breach of judicial duty.”
To some degree, the group’s surprising statement reflects the fact that an openly-gay SCOTUS nominee would take religious rights groups, and the rest of us, into uncharted political waters, since there hasn’t been one before. And it also suggests that some leading members of the Republican Party may find themselves to the right of leading religious groups on the question of whether to tolerate an openly gay Supreme Court justice.