Polish president vetoes bills to recognize same-sex couples

I remember when the religious people claimed same sex marriage would be giving special rights to gays / lesbians that straight people did not have. As if straight people couldn’t already marry who they loved.  Now the bigots openly admit it is entirely about keeping special rights and privileges for themselves.  And same gender couples harm no one and cause no lack of status or dignity for the joining in the legal partnership of marriage.  The real reasons that most of the bigots claim that marriage is only for straight male / female pairings are religious in nature as if marriage did not exist before Christianity got involved with it.  That is crazy and they know it.  People were pairing up long before the Christian church decided to make females male property. Again the bigots like to claim that female / male couples are best for children and the bedrock of society which denies the truth of well documented studies and data.  The fact is studies have shown that the children of same gender couples do as well if not even better than the children of opposite gender couples.  And societies were formed, grew, and functioned very well without the need for such strict gender conforming couples.  It is just uninformed bigotry of a religious nature and the desperate need not to extend equal rights to everyone.   Hugs


https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2026/07/polish-president-vetoes-bills-to-recognize-same-couples/

Photo of the author

Alex Bollinger (He/Him)July 22, 2026, 9:00 am EDT

The president of Poland, Karol Nawrocki, vetoed two bills last week that would have extended recognition to same-sex couples.

The bills would have created “cohabitation contracts,” according to Reuters, which would have given some legal recognition to same-sex couples when it comes to medical information, property rights, and funeral arrangements.

The bills were part of reforms promised when Prime Minister Donald Tusk took office in 2023, which included measures regarding LGBTQ+ people’s rights and abortion. The current ruling coalition in parliament is considered liberal and pro-European.

Nawrocki, though, ran as an independent in 2025 after having been chosen as the candidate for the right-wing Law and Justice (PiS) party, moving the country to the right. He said that the cohabitation contracts were too similar to marriage.


LGBTQ+ rights advocates denounced the vetoes. The organization Campaign Against Homophobia said that the bills were “merely a fragment” of what they wanted to get when it comes to domestic partnership rights in the country.

“Today’s veto of the bill, however, shows that even the absolute minimum of rights the bill was intended to provide is too much for the president,” the group said.

Former Equality Minister and New Left Member of Parliament Katarzyna Kotula said Nawroicki “turned his back on 2 million people living today in informal relationships.”

Earlier this year, a gay couple who traveled to Berlin to get married won the right in court to have their marriage recognized in Poland.

Subscribe to the  LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.


A veteran online reporter, Alex Bollinger has been covering LGBTQ+ news since the Bush administration. He’s now the editor-in-chief of LGBTQ Nation. He has a Masters in Economic Theory and Econometrics from the Paris School of Economics. He lives in Montpellier.

DOJ declines to turn over additional Epstein files, says redactions were appropriate

tRump is desperate not to have anymore files or information released.  His personal lawyer / attack dog is now the person in charge of the DOJ.  He will do or say anything to protect tRump and the wealthy abusers.  I fear that this was very close to saying to the court “go fuck yourself, we are not going to obey the court”.  Hugs


 

https://abcnews.com/Politics/doj-declines-turn-additional-epstein-files-redactions/story?id=134430675

A judge ordered DOJ to turn over more files or explain why they were withheld.

July 2, 2026, 11:51 PM

The Department of Justice on Thursday declined to turn over additional information from the Epstein files as ordered by a judge, arguing the materials include sensitive victim information or were appropriately redacted as required by law. 

Hours ahead of the deadline to turn over the materials or explain why they were properly withheld, Associate U.S. Attorney General Stanley Woodward asked the judge to delay the deadline by 60 days or disregard it entirely by accepting the DOJ’s reasons for withholding the materials. 

“Although the Government strongly disagrees with the Court’s ruling that the [Epstein Files Transparency Act] is enforceable by private parties through the Administrative Procedure Act, the Government welcomes this opportunity to resolve any confusion regarding the records at issue in this case,” Woodward wrote. 

PHOTO: UNITED-STATES-WASHINGTON-DOJ-EPSTEIN-LIBRARY-PORTRAIT
Close up image of a tablet screen displaying a portrait of Jeffrey Epstein beside the official U.S. Department of Justice website page titled Epstein Library in Washington District of Columbia United States on February 11, 2026.
Veronique Tournier/Hans Lucas/AFP via Getty Images
According to Woodward, some emails in question — which had their senders and recipients concealed — were redacted to protect the names of victims. For one of the emails, Woodward claimed that some of the information was withheld because “many communications written by victims, without context, can appear disturbing on their face.” 

Woodward also claimed that the redactions to a draft 2007 indictment from the Southern District of Florida were present in the original file obtained by the Department of Justice and that they have been unable “to locate an unredacted version of this specific photocopy.”

Regarding the interview notes from a woman who made unsubstantiated assault claims about President Donald Trump, Woodward claimed that the materials were “deemed duplicative of the typewritten reports memorializing the interviews.” 

“Their handwritten nature further complicates the redaction process and increases the risk of inadvertent disclosure of victim [personal identifiable information] — including because of technical limitations on the Department’s ability to run meaningful quality control checks for victim PII across handwritten materials,” he wrote. 

The claims made by the woman were uncorroborated, and Trump has denied the allegations. The DOJ has released the interview reports from some of those interviews, but not the underlying notes.

PHOTO: Justice Antitrust
The U.S. Department of Justice logo is seen on a podium before a news conference, Monday, May 4, 2026, in Washington.
Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP

Woodward also pushed back on the U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan’s conclusion that the Department of Justice effectively conceded that they violated the law passed by Congress to force the release of the Epstein files. 

 “Indeed, the Department has not knowingly violated, nor has it ever acknowledged violating, the EFTA as it continues working to comply with statutory requirements,” he wrote. 

In his order last week, Sullivan rejected the DOJ’s arguments against releasing the materials and concluded that the Public Integrity Project, a public interest law firm, demonstrated that independent journalist Katie Phang was harmed by the materials being withheld. 

The DOJ began releasing thousands of pages of documents related to Epstein late last year, following the release of the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

However, the department faced criticism from some lawmakers who questioned whether the department violated the act by withholding some materials and missing the deadline to release the files.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has stated repeatedly that the DOJ has complied with the law.

Childhood should be for children to play and learn, not work and earn

This is the world capitalists want to return to.

 

Trump’s Miami Library Monstrosity Is A Total Scam

tRump couldn’thelp himself but he had to attack Obama making claims of how bad Obama’s library is.  Then Sam describes tRump’s grift / scam on his library, using tax free dollars to build a hotel that he will make money from.  Then Sam talks about the citizenship birthright case.  Hugs

Supreme Court Justices Jackson and Kavanaugh clash over handling of Trump cases

Kavanaugh claims the court does the same for every president not just tRump.  The facts don’t show that to be true.  tRump has a near perfect record of the court giving himwhat ever he asks for, while Biden was often either denied a chance for the court to rule or the court ruled against him  often having to ignore precedent and prior rulings to do so.  Either tRump has compromising material on the right wing justices or they are ruling based on poltical idology and racism. Hugs.


https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-justices-jackson-kavanaugh-clash-handling-trump-cases-rcna262622

Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson and conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh disagreed about frequent rulings in favor of the Trump administration at a rare joint appearance.
A split composite image of Kentanji Brown Jackson, left, and Brett Kavanaugh.

Supreme Court Justices Kentanji Brown Jackson, left, and Brett Kavanaugh.AP; Getty Images

WASHINGTON — Internal Supreme Court divisions over how the high court has frequently ruled in favor of the Trump administration in emergency situations spilled out into public Monday with liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson and conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh locking horns.

The court’s conservative majority has on a regular basis blocked lower court rulings that have stymied President Donald Trump’s agenda, sparking criticism from within and outside the judiciary.

Jackson, often a vocal dissenter in those cases, forcefully aired her critique of the court’s actions in a rare public appearance with Kavanaugh at an event for lawyers and judges held at the federal courthouse in Washington.

Bemoaning the recent increase in such emergency filings — requested to challenge lower court rulings — she suggested that the number of filings would drop if the court were stingier about granting them.

The procedure has become known as the “shadow docket” because the court rarely hears arguments and often issues terse decisions with little explanation. The Supreme Court decisions can allow policies to go into effect at early stages in legal challenges, long before lower courts have reached any definitive conclusions. The cases might then return to the Supreme Court later in the process, leading to final decisions on the merits.

In the last year, the court has, among other things, allowed Trump to fire thousands of federal workers, assert control over previously independent federal agencies and implement various aspects of his hard-line immigration policy. All those moves, done through the shadow docket, had been blocked by lower courts.

“I just feel like this uptick in the court’s willingness to get involved … is a real unfortunate problem,” Jackson said. Among other things, it affects how lower court judges approach cases, as they already have a preliminary sense of how the Supreme Court might approach them on appeal, creating “a warped kind of proceeding,” she added.

Jackson and Kavanaugh  during introductions at the beginning of Monday's event.
Jackson and Kavanaugh during introductions at the beginning of Monday’s event.Lawrence Hurley / NBC News

“It’s not serving the court or this country well,” Jackson said.

Kavanaugh, usually in the majority in shadow docket cases, defended the court — as he has done in the past — saying it has to act one way or another when the government or another litigant files an emergency application.

Kavanaugh noted that the increase in government applications is not unique to Trump, saying the court also granted similar requests made by the Biden administration, albeit at a lower rate.

The reason successive administrations have rushed to the Supreme Court is that presidents have relied more on executive orders in recent years because of the difficulty of persuading Congress to enact legislation, and those actions are often challenged in court, he said.

The justices have aired their disagreements in written opinions, but this was a rare example of two justices entering into a public debate about internal court business.

“None of us enjoy this,” Kavanaugh said of the shadow docket trend, noting that the court has opted in some cases to hear oral arguments and issue longer written rulings in response to some of the criticism.

“We have to have the same position regardless of who is president,” he added, a statement that Jackson expressed agreement with.

Responding to questions posed by Washington-based Senior U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman, the justices were otherwise mostly on the same page during the hourlong event.

In particular, they both expressed concern about the increase in violent threats against judges. Recently, judges who have ruled against Trump have been regular targets.

“There’s no easy answer, for sure,” Jackson said. “It’s unfortunate because it relates to a lack of understanding about judicial independence.”

Kavanaugh praised Chief Justice John Roberts, who he said had “picked his spots” to push back against the criticism.

Roberts, for example, put out a statement rebuking Trump and his allies for suggesting judges should be impeached for ruling against the administration. One of the judges some Republicans want to impeach, Chief Judge James E. Boasberg of Washington, D.C., was among those at Monday’s event.


TN Advances Bills To Legalize Anti-LGBTQ Discrimination

TN Advances Bills To Legalize Anti-LGBTQ Discrimination

February 13, 2026

Nashville’s NPR affiliate reports:

Tennessee lawmakers have advanced a host of anti-LGBTQ bills that would run counter to U.S. Supreme Court precedent. Two measures, both proposed by Rep. Gino Bulso, R-Franklin, would challenge landmark cases that legalized same-sex marriage and established protections for discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Rep. Gloria Johnson, D-Knoxville, questioned the legality to going against Bostock v. Clayton County, which established that LGBTQ people are protected from discrimination under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Tom Lee, member of the Board of Directors of the Tennessee Pride Chamber, spoke against the bill, arguing that it could allow discrimination against LGBTQ couples.

“Imagine if under this bill a private employer said, ‘Well, you can’t take family leave because I, as a private citizen, don’t recognize — using the language of the bill — your purported marriage,’” Lee said. “Or a bank says, ‘You’ll pay the higher rate (for unmarried couples). We’re not bound by the 14th Amendment. You’re not married in our eyes.’”

From my January 2025 report:

The Banning Bostock Act would codify that laws prohibiting sex discrimination would not prohibit discrimination against a person for being homosexual or transgender, nor would it prohibit discrimination because of sexual orientation, sexual behavior, gender identity, or gender non-conforming behavior.

Meanwhile, the next bill would allow private citizens, businesses, and organizations to refuse to recognize same-sex marriage, and protect attorneys from being punished for refusing to celebrate or perform a same sex marriage.

Bulso first appeared here in February 2024 for his ultimately failed bid to ban Pride flags, which he is now attempting again. In April 2024, we heard from Bulso when he objected to a ban on marriages between first cousins because gays can’t make babies. Last year Bulso launched a failed bid to fill the US House seat left open by the abrupt resignation of Rep. Mark Green.

 

Kansas Gov Vetoes Anti-Trans Bathroom Bounty Bill

Why is the most intense bigotry always seem to be pushed by Christians?  I don’t understand the hate because no one is walking around nude in bathrooms, and women’s bathrooms do not have urinals just enclosed stalls.   No one can see in the stalls.  All the talk of protecting little girls is BS because if a man ws going to hurt a child he wouldn’t have to pretend to be trans, he would just walk in and do it.  Nope this is all about making trans lives miserable and keeping them out of the public / society.  This is all about forcing their religious views on everyone else.  There church doctrines don’t accept trans people so no one can accept trans people or be trans in public according to them.  They see no problem forcing their religious views on everyone else but scream to their highest heaven when they are told they have to respect other people’s views. Hugs

Kansas Gov Vetoes Anti-Trans Bathroom Bounty Bill

February 13, 2026

First, the backstory about the bill:

Just last week, the Kansas legislature passed some of the most far-reaching measures to push trans and gender-nonconforming people out of public life to date. Bathroom bans that bar trans people from restrooms aligned with their gender identity have become grimly common; over 20 states have such a law on the books. But Kansas’s new anti-trans bathroom bill adds a dangerous twist: a bounty hunter provision.

The law would permit private citizens to sue and seek monetary reward based on claiming to encounter a trans person in the bathroom. That’s on top of some of the harshest punishments of any existing bathroom bans, such as criminal charges, steep fines and even jail time.

The language of the bill, while vague, says that any person who alleges to be “aggrieved” by the presence of a trans person they encounter in a restroom facility can file a civil suit against that individual for “damages” of at least $1,000. Kansas Republicans rushed through the bathroom ban, skirting public comment by essentially sneaking the bill into another piece of legislation aimed at denying trans people correct government IDs.

Just in via press release:

The following veto message is from Governor Kelly regarding her veto of House Substitute for Senate Bill 244:

“This poorly drafted bill will have numerous and significant consequences far beyond the intent to limit the right for trans people to use the appropriate bathroom. Under this bill: If your grandfather is in a nursing home in a shared room, as a granddaughter, you would not be able to visit him. If your wife is in a shared hospital room, as a husband, you would not be able to visit her.

“If your sister is living in a dorm at K-State, as a brother, you would not be able to visit her in her room. If you feel you have to accompany your nine-year-old daughter to the restroom at a sporting event, as a father, you would have to either enter the women’s restroom with her or let her use the restroom alone.

“I believe the Legislature should stay out of the business of telling Kansans how to go to the bathroom and instead stay focused on how to make life more affordable for Kansans. “Therefore, under Article 2, Section 14(a) of the Constitution, I hereby veto House Substitute for Senate Bill 244.”

The bill passed with a veto-proof majority in both chambers, so an override is probably likely. The bill’s author is GOP Rep. Susan Humphries, whose bio notes that she is a graduate of Texas Christian University. Humphries last appeared here in 2024 for her bill that would somehow ban minors from visiting any website that mentions LGBTQs.

Kristi Noem says she will ensure the ‘right people’ vote in midterms and elect ‘the right leaders’

By the right people does she mean white people from majority red states and by elect the right leaders does she mean republicans who kiss tRump’s fat ass?  The constitution is clear that the states run elections not tRump and his election deniers.   The fact is undocumented people cannot vote in federal elections.  Some states or communities do let adults who live there vote on local matters.  Also why is tRump being allowed to make laws through excutive ordeers instead of congress?  He can’t do that.  Where are the democrats to challenge these things?  Hugs

https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/krisit-noem-voter-id-midterms-b2920636.html

The Homeland Security Secretary said her department was responsible for election security

Mike Bedigan in New York

 
Kristi Noem appeared to suggest the Department of Homeland Security was responsible for election security and said she would ensure the “right people” were voting to elect “the right leaders.”

“Elections is another one of those critical infrastructure responsibilities that I have as well, and I would say that many people believe that it may be one of the most important things that we need,” the DHS Secretary said at a press conference Friday.

“To make sure we trust is reliable, and that when it gets to election day that we’ve been proactive to make sure that we have the right people voting, electing the right leaders to lead this country through the days that we have – knowing that people can trust it.”

During the conference in Arizona, which has been one of the hotspots of national election fraud conspiracies, Noem said she had the authority to identify “vulnerabilities” in the election system and implement “mitigation measures” to ensure elections are “run correctly” at both a state and national level.

The comments sparked outrage online, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer added: “This is Trump’s idea of democracy: leaders get to select their voters instead of the other way around.”

Kristi Noem appeared to suggest the Department of Homeland Security was responsible for election security and said she would ensure the ‘right people’ were voting to elect ‘the right leaders’

Kristi Noem appeared to suggest the Department of Homeland Security was responsible for election security and said she would ensure the ‘right people’ were voting to elect ‘the right leaders’ (AP)

Homeland Dems added: “DHS talking about the ‘right people’ voting should alarm every American.  After the President threatened to nationalize elections, the threat is unmistakable.”

Republicans Against Trump rote on X: “Saying the quiet part out loud.”

The Independent has contacted the DHS for clarification on Noem’s remarks.

It comes after the House passed the SAVE America Act Wednesday, a bill that would require Americans to provide proof of U.S. citizenship to register for federal elections through showing a photo ID.

If signed into law, the legislation would also force states to remove non-citizens from electoral rolls, though it must still pass the Senate, where some Republicans have indicated they may not support its passage.

On Friday Donald Trump appeared to suggest that he would sign an Executive Order forcing photo ID to be shown at elections, even if it was not congressionally approved. “There will be Voter I.D. for the Midterm Elections, whether approved by Congress or not!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

On Friday Donald Trump appeared to suggest that he would sign an Executive Order forcing photo ID to be shown at elections, even if it was not congressionally approved

On Friday Donald Trump appeared to suggest that he would sign an Executive Order forcing photo ID to be shown at elections, even if it was not congressionally approved (AP)

The president’s words have led to critics’ concerns over potential for tampering with the midterm elections in Novembers, and the potential for legal voters to be dismissed over technicalities with their documentation.

Noem pushed back on such suggestions on Friday, saying: “Each of the arguments laid out to criticize this bill are baseless speculation from the radical left because they want illegal aliens to vote in our elections.”

It comes after a bombshell report alleged that the DHS is in a state of “constant chaos” under Noem’s leadership, and that of her top adviser Corey Lewandowski.

A bombshell report alleged that the DHS is in a state of ‘constant chaos’ under Noem’s leadership, and that of her top adviser Corey Lewandowski

A bombshell report alleged that the DHS is in a state of ‘constant chaos’ under Noem’s leadership, and that of her top adviser Corey Lewandowski (Getty)

The Wall Street Journal cited sources within the department who are highly critical of Noem and described her as a politician who has sought to “burnish her personal stardom at every turn.”

Noem has “staged a headline grabbing immigration crackdown while sidelining rivals and dissenters,” the newspaper states, noting the secretary’s penchant for posing in agency-branded flak jackets and caps and bearing guns as props “all with an eye to her style, with TV-ready hair and makeup.”

It reports that President Donald Trump has entertained calls to fire Noem and Lewandowski amid discontent about their management of the department, although he has so far refrained from doing so.

Let’s talk about the SAVE Act, the Constitution, the filibuster, and the Senate….

I had read it couldn’t pass the senate but I was not sure.  This act scares me because all the people who took a spouse’s last name wouldn’t be able to vote.  I am one of those and as everyone who reads the blog knows I am very much into politics and voting.  One of the things listed in project 2025 was to stop women from voting and remove women from the work force.  Yes the people who wrote project 2025 do not see women as full human people deserving of the same things as men.  They want women to be tied to a male either their father and then a second male who is a husband and the woman would have to be subservient to both.   It is horrific the way they see females.  Hugs

Ruling not by the law but by political ideology

https://liberalsarecool.com/post/787549086507237376/all-these-justices-are-going-against-their

#SCOTUS from Liberals Are Cool

#SCOTUS from Liberals Are Cool

#SCOTUS from Liberals Are Cool

#SCOTUS from Liberals Are Cool

#SCOTUS from Liberals Are Cool

All these justices are going against their previous opinions now that a Republican is in the White House.

The lying, the perjury, the deception. MAGA101