The following article was posted on the Axios website June 28, 2018:
Credit: Robert Alexander, Getty Images
A shift of fewer than 80,000 votes in three states (Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin) — or 0.06% of 137 million cast — would not just have made Hillary Clinton president.
The bottom line: Perhaps even more important for the long run, a young liberal Supreme Court might have ruled on America for a generation.<
Fred Korematsu, whose legal challenge of the WWII internment orders was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1944, at his family nursery (third from left). Credit: POV: Of Civil Wrongs and Rights
For decades, Karen Korematsu has hoped and prayed that someday the U.S. Supreme Court would overturn its infamous 1944 decision upholding the mass incarceration of her father, Fred, and 120,000 others of Japanese descent during World War II.
But when the high court condemned that decision Tuesday, Korematsu was not overjoyed. She was disheartened.
“My heart sank,” she said. “I feel the court all over again dishonored my father and what he stood for. To me what the Supreme Court did was substitute one injustice for another.”
Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Kavanaugh, is a threat to women’s health. If he is successfully appointed, he would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. We know this because Trump admitted it is a litmus test for his Supreme Court nominees, and because Kavanaugh has a long record of undermining women’s access to reproductive care.
Trump said that overturning Roe v. Wade would be a litmus test for his nominee.
“It is. It is.” – Trump, on whether overturning Roe v. Wade would be a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees, 2015
“I will be appointing pro-life judges.” – Trump, 2016
Why are people concerned with what’s happening with Pres. Trump’s pick to replace Justice Kennedy? Here’s why:
Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Kavanaugh, is a threat to Americans’ health care and women’s rights. If confirmed, he will be an extremist on the Supreme Court bench, where he will be able to carry out a far-right agenda long after Trump leaves office.
This is the most consequential Supreme Court nomination in a generation and will affect monumental decisions made for the next half century. It could roll back women’s rights, and the right to affordable and accessible health care, for decades to come. Continue reading “What about Trump’s Supreme Court Nomineee Brett Kavanaugh?”
In both the “you can’t make this stuff up” and “this is what we’re concerned about” schools, here is a release the Trump White House sent out citing support for Judge Kavanaugh.
Notice anything? Every person on the list is a man. There is not…one…single…woman. With concern on this judge’s position on Roe v. Wade, this is especially concerning: Continue reading “34 Men, 0 Women”
The following article by Todd Ruger was posted on the Roll Call website February 26, 2018:
Case about dues could have a far-reaching impact on labor unions
Hilary O. Shelton, director of the NAACP’s Washington bureau, appears outside the Supreme Court on Monday in support of unions as the Court hears arguments on a lawsuit filed by Illinois state worker Mark Janus. Janus says his rights are being violated by having to pay dues to a union he doesn’t support. Credit: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call
Justice Neil Gorsuch likely holds the key vote in a major labor case that drew dueling protests outside the Supreme Court building for Monday’s oral arguments, but he did nothing to tip his hand about his thinking.
Gorsuch did not ask a question during an hour of arguments, while the other eight justices appeared to be equally split along ideological lines. The case asks the justices to overturn a decades-old precedent and deal a financial blow to the unions that represent teachers and other public-sector employees. Continue reading “Supreme Court Appears Split on Union Case”
The following article by Todd Ruger was posted on the Roll Call website February 26, 2018:
The U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington. Credit: Carlos Barria/Reuters
The Supreme Court appears set to overturn a decades-old precedent and deal a financial blow to Democratic-aligned unions that represent teachers and other public-sector employees in a major case with blatant political overtones.
Ahead of oral arguments Monday, two Democratic senators sent the justices this message: The Supreme Court’s reputation is at stake, and overturning the 1977 ruling will further erode the public’s confidence that the federal courts are neutral and above politics. Continue reading “Senators Warn Union Case Risks Supreme Court’s Reputation”
The following article by Maria Sacchetti was posted on the Washington Post website January 16, 2018:
The Trump administration is appealing an injunction on the phaseout of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, and asking the Supreme Court to get involved. (Jenny Starrs/The Washington Post)
The Justice Department on Tuesday said it would take the “rare step” of asking the Supreme Court to overturn a judge’s ruling and allow the Trump administration to dismantle a program that provides work permits to undocumented immigrants raised in the United States.
The following article by Adam Liptak was posted on the New York Times website January 15, 2018:
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said that statistical evidence said to show that Wisconsin’s voting districts had been warped by political gerrymandering struck him as “sociological gobbledygook.” Credit T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York Times
WASHINGTON — In October, when the Supreme Court heard argumentsin a case that could reshape American politics, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. registered an objection. There was math in the case, he said, and it was complicated.
“It may be simply my educational background,” the chief justice said, presumably referring to his Harvard degrees in history and law. But he said that statistical evidence said to show that Wisconsin’s voting districts had been warped by political gerrymandering struck him as “sociological gobbledygook.”
Judge Wynn directed his criticism to Republican state lawmakers, who had urged his three-judge Federal District Court to ignore what they called “a smorgasbord of alleged ‘social science’ theories,” and not to Chief Justice Roberts. But Judge Wynn did use one of Chief Justice Roberts’s most prominent opinions to make the point that numbers can have a role to play in judicial decision making. Continue reading “A Case for Math, Not ‘Gobbledygook,’ in Judging Partisan Voting Maps”
The following article by Philip Rucker, Josh Dawsey and Ashley Parker was posted on the Washington Post website December 19, 2017:
Supreme Court Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, center, and Justice Anthony Kennedy, right, listen as President Trump speaks at Gorsuch’s swearing-in ceremony in the White House Rose Garden on April 10. (Ricky Carioti/The Washington Post)
The collapse of three of President Trump’s judicial nominations in the span of a week has embarrassed the White House, revealed weaknesses in its vetting process and threatened to cause Senate Republicans to apply more scrutiny to the president’s picks.
In their push to fill scores of vacancies on federal circuit and district courts at the historic pace demanded by Trump, White House officials have overlooked vulnerabilities in the backgrounds of some nominees. Critics allege that White House counsel Donald McGahn, who is overseeing the process, has sacrificed traditional qualifications for ideological purity and youth. Continue reading “‘He’s not weak, is he?’: Inside Trump’s quest to alter the judiciary”
Why are people concerned with what’s happening with Pres. Trump’s pick to replace Justice Kennedy? Here’s why:
