James Finn
1 min readJan 22, 2022

--

I think part of the legal difficulty with this case is that the child is in FL and not under the care of the TN agency in question. The child has not sued, and given the state of FL politics, there's probably an icicle's chance in hell that his legal guardian, the State of FL, will sue on his behalf.

The plaintiffs here are not technically being denied the right to adopt a particular child; they're being denied the foster care training they need to gain certification to be allowed to foster or adopt any child.

The only agency in their county that provides such training won't work with them because they're Jews. This case really should be, in light of those facts, open and shut in favor of the plaintiffs. It's way more clear cut than the Supreme Court case last year where a Catholic diocese could legitimately say potential foster and adoptive parents had many other viable choices.

We shall see. It'll be interesting to see not only what the courts will do, but what the UMC will do with a member agency being openly anti semitic.

--

--

James Finn
James Finn

Written by James Finn

James Finn is an LGBTQ columnist, a former Air Force intelligence analyst, an alumnus of Act Up NY, and an agented but unpublished novelist.

Responses (1)