New government spending bill bans U.S. embassies from flying Pride flag
Source: CBS News/AFP
March 23, 2024 / 6:40 PM EDT
Tucked in the massive government funding package signed Saturday by President Biden is a provision banning the flying of LGBTQ Pride flags over U.S. embassies. But even on the same day Mr. Biden signed the package, the White House vowed to work toward repealing the provision.
The prohibition was one of many side issues included in the mammoth $1.2 trillion package to fund the government through September, which passed early Saturday shortly after a midnight deadline.
As Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson, a conservative Christian, scrambled for votes to get the bill passed in his chamber, he allegedly touted the Pride flag ban as a reason his party should support the bill, the Daily Beast reported.
The White House said Saturday it would seek to find a way to repeal the ban on flying the rainbow flag, which celebrates the movement for LGBTQ equality. "Biden believes it was inappropriate to abuse the process that was essential to keep the government open by including this policy targeting LGBTQI+ Americans," a White House statement said, adding that the president "is committed to fighting for LGBTQI+ equality at home and abroad."
Read more: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-embassies-banned-from-flying-pride-flags-new-government-spending-bill/
= new reply since forum marked as read
It was passed under Clinton as S.4 - Line Item Veto Act of 1996, who used it much to the GOP's chagrin.
It was taken to court and struck down by the SCOTUS in 1998 -
Clinton disappointed; Opponents of veto call it a victory for the Constitution
WASHINGTON (AllPolitics, June 25) -- The line-item veto is unconstitutional, the Supreme Court decided Thursday, ruling that Congress did not have the authority to hand that power to the president.
Line Item Veto
The 6-3 ruling said that the Constitution gives a president only two choices: either sign legislation or send it back to Congress. The 1996 line-item veto law allowed the president to pencil out specific spending items approved by the Congress. In his majority opinion Justice John Paul Stevens upheld a lower court's decision, concluding "the procedures authorized by the line-item veto act are not authorized by the Constitution."
If Congress wants to give the president that power, they will have to pass a constitutional amendment, Stevens said. "If there is to be a new procedure in which the president will play a different role in determining the text of what may become a law, such change must come not by legislation but through the amendment procedures set forth in Article V of the Constitution," Stevens said.
The court's ruling was a defeat for the Clinton Administration, which asked the high court to reverse the lower court's ruling. President Bill Clinton, traveling in China, said he was "deeply disappointed." Clinton was the first president to exercise the veto, which he did 82 times last year. Many of the vetoed programs are under court challenges and should now win their appeals.
(snip)
https://web.archive.org/web/20081008092502/http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/06/25/scotus.lineitem/
Shrub tried to get a replacement in 2006 but that went nowhere. Russ Feingold and John McCain tried once more in 2009 and that also went nowhere.
They like their "pork".
You'll have loons in the GOP vote against it and then go back to their Districts and tout how they "brought dollars back to their state for their constitutents".
By November, we'll have the House, the Senate and the White House and they'll all be flying the BLUE flag.
So this little "pride" thing is meaningless.
It's their brand.
Hey, GOP. I hope you see this in your dreams.
Every single night.
