[ad_1]
The highest courts in the United States have undeniably shifted to the right in their first term since the death of liberal icon Ruth Bader Ginsburg, experts say, with a central bloc of conservative judges exercising their influence for change decisions.
But nine Supreme Court justices have handed down nearly 70 decisions this term that together represent a more nuanced picture than some conservatives might have expected when Amy Coney Barrett was jury last year as Ginsburg’s replacement, for example, by rejecting a challenge to the signing of Barack Obama’s health care law that Republicans have long hoped to give up.
However, other cases have led to a sharp easing of the power of the 6-3 Conservative majority, such as a ruling that upheld two Arizona voting laws that according to opponents discriminated against racial minorities, which was decided on. last day of the term and was neatly divided along the ideological line.
The court’s eagerness for commitment will be put to the test when it returns in the fall to an agenda that already includes controversial issues such as abortion and gun rights.
“Without a doubt, having Amy Coney Barrett, who is quite conservative, replaces Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who was very liberal, clearly that makes a difference,” said Ilya Somin, a law professor at George Mason University and an adjunct academic at libertarian Cato. High school.
“On the other hand… It is wrong to say that this is a monolithically conservative tribunal that will radically renew large areas of constitutional law,” he added.
Legal experts point out that a group of four Republican-appointed judges – Chief Justice John Roberts and Donald Trump-appointed Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Barrett – have the ability to decide cases.
“Both can join the three Democrats and have joined the three Democrats,” said Lee Epstein, a law professor at the University of Washington in St. Louis. “It’s not… A court where Democrats will lose all cases.”
A widely cited ruling is the court’s 7-2 opinion rejecting the latest Republican challenge to the Affordable Care Act. Stephen Breyer wrote the majority opinion, along with the other two Liberal judges – Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan – and four Conservative colleagues. The seven judges agreed that the plaintiffs had no reason to sue, as they had not suffered any harm under Obama’s most important health care reforms. Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito disagreed.
Another is the judicial one unanimous decision of the student athletes who filed an antitrust challenge against the National Collegiate Athletic Association. The nine judges agreed that the restrictions set by the NCAA on scholarships and other benefits were unfair.
“The mix of current judges is fascinating,” said Jonathan Turley, a professor at George Washington University School of Law. “Most opinions do not show the kind of clear demarcation or robotic responses that critics have suggested.”
Progressives fear, however, that the court may go further right next year, when the bank will hear cases on two of America’s most politically divisive issues: abortion and weapons.
Decisions are expected to be made in the spring or summer of 2022, just months before the midterm elections, when both houses of Congress are ready.
The abortion case is challenging Roe vs Wade, the 1973 decision enshrining a constitutional right to abortion. It focuses on a Mississippi state law that bans abortions after 15 weeks. The arms case questions the extent to which states can get into the regulation of gun rights, especially when weapons are carried away from home.
Legal experts say they expect the Conservative majority to rule in a way that satisfies the “pro-life” or anti-abortion movement, as well as gun owners who face any limitation of their Second Amendment rights. .
Progressive activists are already on alert following the court ruling on Arizona voting laws. “When it comes to cases related to democracy and the right to vote, Republican judges act as a bloc,” said Brian Fallon, executive director of the left-wing Demand Justice group. “Democrats need to treat this as the emergency situation it is.”
It is unclear how far the bank will be willing to go to overturn previous Supreme Court decisions in the future, especially at a time when Roberts and associate judges have indicated they want the court to be seen as an independent institution and august scope of partisan politics.
“By any metric, it’s the most conservative court in recent memory,” said Debo Adegbile, a partner at law firm Wilmer Hale. “But the court is an institution. It is an institution that must think about its legitimacy and credibility in a very fractured political environment and in a very fractured nation ”.
Somin, of George Mason University, said he believed it was “likely” that the Conservative majority would move the needle in a “more conservative direction.” . . but it doesn’t matter exactly how much they move it, and that’s not clear. “
“I guess they want to allow restrictions on abortion, loosen restrictions on guns, and so on,” Epstein of the University of Washington said in St. Louis. “But how far are they willing to go?”
Additional reports from Christine Zhang in New York
Judicial commitments
The last two Supreme Court decisions of this term were split between a 6 and a 3 second party lines, favoring the Conservative majority. However, several previous decisions within the deadline indicated signs of commitment.
Subject: Economic Assistance Act (“Obamacare”)
Vote: 7-2
Decision: The court he denied an attempt to invalidate the Affordable Care Act, ruling that plaintiffs had no grounds to sue. The decision marked the third time the court has dismissed the challenges in Obamacare, although the court has not addressed the question of whether the ACA was constitutional.
Fulton vs. Philadelphia City, Pennsylvania
Subject: Same-sex adoption
Vote: 9-0
Decision: The court ruled that Philadelphia violated the First Amendment when the city did not renew its contract with a Catholic organization that refused to place foster children with same-sex parents. The vote was unanimous, with Chief Justice Roberts giving the majority opinion, along with the three Liberal magistrates. However, the concurring views of other conservative judges criticized the narrow focus of the ruling, which dodged larger questions about religious freedom exemptions.
National Collegiate Athletic Association vs Alston
Subject: Student athlete compensation
Vote: 9-0
Decision: The court upheld a lower court ruling that the NCAA cannot prohibit universities from providing education-related benefits to athletic students.
School district in the Mahanoy area against BL
Subject: Speech by students outside the school
Vote: 8-1
Decision: The court ruled that a Pennsylvania school district violated the First Amendment when it punished a student for posting a profane message on Snapchat after failing to form the cheerleader’s college team.
[ad_2]
Source link
