Which President Do You Want Picking Them? This election is all about the Supreme Court that will shape our lives for the next 30 years.
The Supreme Court protected the right of women and families to make their own choices. And it did so by reminding us that facts are real. Science is real. Evidence is real. And it can’t be willfully ignored or tarnished or fabricated to advance anti-choice ideology that erodes the constitutional right to reproductive health care.
Reader Comments: Bernie Sanders - What We Want; Clinton Campaign Obstructing Change to Democratic Platform; Supreme Court Rules: Abortion Clinics in Texas Cannot be Shut Down; Brexit - Warning Signal for Trump-Era America?; Bombing Syrian Troops Would Be Illegal; Mexican Teachers Being Jailed and Killed; Chilean Military Liable for Victor Jara Murder; Report Clears Rouseff; Remembering James Green; This Week in History - Arbenz Guzman Deposed in Guatemala; and more...
The U.S. Supreme Court has voted 4-4 in one of the most consequential immigration cases in recent history, United States v. Texas. The High Court's failure to fall one way or another in the case leaves in place a lower court decision that blocks the Obama administration's deferred action immigration initiatives known as DAPA and the expansion of DACA from being implemented. An Atlanta coalition of local community organizations have launched an ICE Free Zones campaign.
There are currently no regulations governing prison grievance processes, and, in the two decades since the law’s passage, many prisons’ procedures have become so onerous and convoluted—“Kafkaesque,” in the words of one federal judge—that inmates whose rights have been violated are watching their cases slip through the cracks.
We should demand that the Senate respect the nominee of the President and give him a fair hearing and a vote But we should do more: we need an ongoing grassroots movement to pressure the White House to select judicial nominees – not only for the Supreme Court but all federal courts – who would bring to the courts a greater regard for social justice as well as more racial and gender diversity.
We should instead explore and promote options that would subordinate the Supreme Court to political control. Now is the right moment to dream of a chastened Court and to envision how that dream may become a reality.
The implications of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's death for the anti-union case known as Friedrichs are a bit uncertain. Some experts say the appellate ruling in favor of the union would be effectively affirmed by an evenly divided court. Others believe the court will ask for re-argument of the same case next term, presumably after it gets back up to full nine-member strength by the appointment and confirmation of successor to Scalia.
The Republican presidential candidates are wrong. Supreme Court nominees can and should be confirmed in election years.
The court is considering whether to overrule its 1977 decision allowing states to require public employees to join a union or pay a fee to cover collective bargaining costs. A win for the plaintiffs—a group of California teachers who say they oppose union efforts to increase pay and protect job security—could cripple public sector unions in about two dozen states that have “agency fee” laws.
Spread the word