Virtually every issue that affects the daily lives of LGBT Americans will ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. 

Outside of President, there is no position other than an appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court that would have a larger impact on gay lives.  This is true in terms of raw jurisprudence, and just as important, in human terms.

There is a true story in the modern U.S. Supreme history that is instructive. In 1987, the Supreme Court ruled in Bowers vs. Hardwick that “homosexuals” were not due any particular Constitutional protection. In that case, Georgia police had entered the home of Michael Hardwick and without probable cause, went deeper into the house to discover Michael and another man in his bedroom. 

Both were arrested under the sodomy statute. 

The court ruled that unlike bias that operates in the case of women or race, for example, there was no particular reason to bring deeper scrutiny to the actions of the state.  That is, they concluded that it made no difference in terms of the aggressive behavior of the police that the men were gay.  (Imagine them entering a married heterosexual couple’s bedroom, and launching a search to determine if they were engaged in sodomy.)

But here is the point.  Justice Powell, a moderate member of the court, was the swing in that case. (He voted against us.)  Based on his judicial rulings he could have gone either way.  But what Justice Powell did not know at the time of the ruling is that he had a gay clerk. 

That clerk remained closeted throughout the deliberations on the case. This decision took 17 years to correct in Lawrence vs. Texas.  During Bowers, at one point, so the story goes, Justice Powell even asked if his clerks or staff knew anyone who was gay in an attempt to get more insight into the case.  

 Silence.

Justice Powell (now deceased) went on to lament his decision in the Bowers case as the least proud moment of his career.  No doubt he would have received more guidance had a strong confident gay person been in his midst.

Imagine a smart gay or lesbian Justice with reasonable social skills joining the rest of the New Yorker cartoon depiction of the court. It would be difficult to imagine anything making LGBT issues more human, more alive than having a colleague who was gay on the Court.  Before any ruling they would know they would have to look their colleague in the eye before opining. 

Imagine having to face Paul Smith (who argued Lawrence vs. Texas so beautifully, not to mention many  other cases before the Supreme Court) smiling every morning as he made his way down the wide marble hallways.  It would be hard to turn your back on Paul Smith.

 Again, most decisions - from the limits of state matrimonial law to whether ERISA must be extended to same sex unions –  will likely be resolved in the Supreme Court of the United States. We would do well to identify some amazing talent and start our quiet campaign to Barack Obama. 

Elizabeth Birch is the former executive director of the Human Rights Campaign

Go back to the main story for more opinions on where we need LGBT officials.