Supreme Court watchers worry Amy Coney Barrett’s ‘originalism’ could uphold racist policies

  • 📰 USATODAY
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 106 sec. here
  • 3 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 46%
  • Publisher: 63%

Law Law Headlines News

Law Law Latest News,Law Law Headlines

Activists and experts argue that Supreme Court justices have cited originalism to uphold segregation and other racist policies, curtail affirmative action and thwart protective measures, such as the Voting Rights Act, that remedy historic injustices.

Originalists also assert that they leave the passing of laws to the legislature and believe the only proper route for change is Constitutional amendment. Samuel Spital, director of litigation at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, says the Constitution has language that is often quite broad and aspirational, particularly as amended with respect to equality and liberty.

The adoption of the 13th Amendment ending slavery and the 14th Amendment granting full citizenship from birth effectively overturned the Dred Scott decision. But in, the Supreme Court ruled in 1873 that in denying Myra Bradwell a law license because she was a woman, Illinois hadn’t violated the 14th Amendment.

She argues that its modern foundation comes from the conservative movement broadly, but Justice William Rehnquist's segregationist views specifically. Rehnquist, who led the court from 1986 to his death in 2005, served 33 years on the high court. He wrote a memo when he was a law clerk in 1952 arguing that the court reaffirm, the 1896 decision that upheld the constitutionality of racial segregation through “separate, but equal” accommodation.

Franks sees originalism as a “fraudulent” attempt to cover the political desire to see the Constitution through a fundamentally conservative lens, which justifies rulings that roll back the rights of people of color, women, immigrants and other groups. Though Barrett's judicial record is not long – she was an appellate judge for only three years – the New York Times called itin cases touching on issues such as abortion, gun rights, discrimination and immigration.

Immediately after Ginsberg’s passing, pro-choice advocates raised alarm about the potential weakening or outright overturn of. While all women who are pro-choice have a stake in a potential overturn, women of color are uniquely affected. Pro-choice advocates contend that narrow limits to abortion have effectively made it harder for poor women and women of color to get safe abortions than their richer or whiter counterparts.

Losing coverage, particularly during the pandemic, would be a major blow to these communities. Black people and Latinos are disproportionately dying from COVID-19. In Chicago, three in four coronavirus-related deaths were Black or Latino, and in May, the Navajo Nation had the highest infection rate in the United States.Many conservatives push back on this concern, pointing to President Trump’s signing of an.

 

Thank you for your comment. Your comment will be published after being reviewed.
Please try again later.

If she followed the constitution as a true originalist, she wouldn't even be on the court as a women, much less a judge or able to vote.

Should worry about anything she does since she went along with the sham MoscowMitch perpetrated on the American in stealing a Scotus seat DURING an election.

The supreme court is solely there to uphold the laws enacted by congress... If people want change vote for people you believe will write and enact laws that benefit the people.... Stop asking the judicial branch to make or change law... It's not their job!!!

The originalist, who should not be on the court? GTFOH it’s about the racism

It has never been the Courts job to legislate from the bench. It is true that since the ‘60’s that SC has ruled on many issues by judicial fiat.without regard for the Constitution. A direct attack on the founding document. To the extent she is able to bring the Original intent.

CJ Rehnquist, too, regarded Dred Scott as judicial activism, and an example of a living constitution decision. This is an example of how we can argue about anything we want to suit an ideology. SC decisions are abound with such evidence.

Originalism is akin to Religious Fundamentalism. And both are wrong.

This racist women should have never had her job to begin with! SMH! This is americas exact problem!

You know that congress can amend the constitution and pass laws, right? Better to keep SCOTUS out of it. SCOTUS determines constitutionality. Congress determines the constitution.

Is this a real fvcking headline!? Wow

The left is just trying to throw smoke with this

oh well, cant plz everyone

Fear mongers!

Originalism to restore the racist slave owning values of a long defeated past!

That's why the court MUST be stacked.

Turkey, hold my beer: This is what Theology looks like.

Such garbage......conservative does not equal racist! I’m so tired of that worn-out accusation.

Uphold segregation Ha what a load of bullshit

“Activists” of all political stripes have cause more problems and divisions in this country than they have done good. Most people work and live their lives. These people lie and divide

And they've cited the opposite of originalism to justify killing unborn babies.

I’m so tired of these stories of fretting about this SC. Bottom line is MFs didn’t vote in 2016. As a consequence it won’t be long until civil rights, consumer protections, environmental regs and labor rights will be determined by what state you live with no federal standard.

Nonsense. If you are going say that the Supreme Court will “uphold segregation and other racist policies” you should put the instances of segregation & the racist policies in your article. All you are doing is race baiting. USAToday is no newspaper, it is the EnemyofThePeople

Talk about fear mongering. Wow!

No it's just you guys saying that

🇺🇸 CITIZENS, FOR ONCE THINK...WHY IS DJT,, HIS ENABLERS & GOP TRYING SO HARD TO SUPPRESS VOTES? THEY WILL STOOP DOWN TO ANY LEVEL TO RETAIN POWER. DONT LET THEM DO THIS. THEY WANT TO TAKE AWAY A RIGHT FROM OUR HANDS. THEREFORE, FROM YOUR SIDE, VOTE IN PERSON ON 11/3.

Of all the women trump has called nasty, dirty and disgusting - this handmaid beginner lawyer is about to time travel us back to 'the good old days'

Originality would also mean ACB would not be allowed to serve on the Supreme Court. And be relegated to looking after all her children at home.

All the really smart, emotionally intelligent people in the world and we end up with a reality TV WWF president and a flat out twat to replace RBG. I hope we’re at rock bottom and not still diving

Even more experts with far better credentials say most everything in this article is incorrect and you are full of lies and distortions.

Originalism translates to RACISM. FULL STOP.

BOOM... GOT YOUR ASS TRUMP... YOU CALLED ON THESE PEOPLE... WE WILL IMPEACH YOUR ASS AGAIN BUT THIS TIME WE HAVE OVER 20 REPUBLICAN SENATORS WHO WILL VOTE YES! (and dont bother asking who... there will be no intimidation tactics this time!)

Other experts say that there is an established process for addressing historic wrongs, it’s called the Legislative branch.

A giant step back...

ACB is now a Supreme Court Justice. The infantile rantings from activists and pseudo-experts (they’re just activists with degrees) don’t diminish her superb qualifications or the rigor and fairness that the Originalism philosophy brings to jurisprudence.

There is no need to think that a liberal charismatic on the left of the Churches should be herself a judicial originaliste- she gave no indication of that disposition or old style philosophy at the hearings, so more power to the girl, nice to have girls in the Supreme Court btw..

USA Today is a total liberal rag !

Originalism is just a bullshit word to sanitize what the do

There is only one way to override judicial activism. An Amendment to impose judicial term limits and require a timely and fair confirmation process to allow every senator to vote on every nominee including Garland and ACB.

Which experts and activists? Wouldn’t be leftists would they? Of course they would.

Let it go, let it go! You're not relevant anymore!

The originalism...'All men(people)are created equal' sounds right to me.

This is an endless song and dance. Originalism is code for yt supremacy and yt supremacy will not end w/o violence bc that is the only language it understands.

In America ~ Doesn’t the Highest Court make the laws?

Women and minorities claiming originality when their participation in government in the 18th century would have been impossible is an irony none of the originalists appreciate whatsoever.

Cry louder pagans!

Keep crying

This is everyday life for me. I'm fighting just for gainful employment. The men and corporate support this kind of behavior in a woman. It's not going to matter what we say in the end.

Those 'activists and experts' are idiots.

Devolution, makes me think males want to devolve back to one sex

I remember when I use to trust USA Today...

Amy and kavanaugh can kiss my ass!! You will never represent the American people, well, maybe for those Trump'pets 🤮

good luck

If she is so impartial, why are Republicans so gleefully celebrating her confirmation?

We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:

 /  🏆 100. in LAW

Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Trump Threatens Supreme Court To Prevent ‘Ridiculous Win’ For Biden, Claims Dems Will Pack CourtIn a flurry of tweets in the early hours of Friday Trump attacked Biden claiming he’ll destroy the Supreme Court Lol nice bullshit headline. no threat was uttered
Source: Forbes - 🏆 394. / 53 Read more »

Brett Kavanaugh Forced To Correct Supreme Court Opinion After Vermont Calls Out False InfoThe justice claimed Vermont hadn’t changed its rules around mail-in voting when it actually had. thanks Did he use a pencil so he could erase it? Jesus tap dancing Christ, what a fucking clown
Source: Forbes - 🏆 394. / 53 Read more »

Minnesota opts against asking Supreme Court to block mail-in ballots rulingMinnesota officials decided on Friday not to seek emergency intervention from the conservative-majority Supreme Court over an appeals ruling that questioned the legality of their decision to count mail-in ballots received after Election Day. 'Where do you intend to spend your Eternity? If you intend to spend your Eternity in the Kingdom of GOD, you MUST prepare in Holiness. ExpressFridayVigil ExpressFridayVigil You must first receive the message of THE LORD and accept it to be able to bring a TRANSFORMATION in your life. who is the geezer on the left ?
Source: Reuters - 🏆 2. / 97 Read more »

Supreme Court rejects 2nd N.C. GOP effort to roll back mail deadlineNEW: The U.S. Supreme Court Thursday denies an emergency effort by Republican leaders of the North Carolina legislature to block lower court rulings that allow 6 extra days for accepting ballots sent by mail. Why don't the republicans want every vote counted? They are waiting until after the election, so they know how they have to cheat for a Trump win. Y?
Source: NBCNews - 🏆 10. / 86 Read more »

Faith, foster care and LGBT rights collide at Supreme CourtThe justices will hear oral arguments on whether the city of Philadelphia can enforce a non-discrimination policy for sexual orientation on Catholic Social Services, a faith-based child welfare agency that does not work with same-sex foster parents. good luck What could go wrong? What a sad society we’ve become. The hate outweighs caring for one another and that in itself ruins many many life’s. There shouldn’t be babies killed at birth and if you don’t want babies get that taken care of then there’s no argument. God Bless All. Amen 🙏
Source: ABC - 🏆 471. / 51 Read more »