In recent days, the Supreme Court of the United States has rendered several landmark decisions.

In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organizationsix of nine justices decided to overturn the court’s landmark 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, which ruled that a woman has a fundamental right under the United States Constitution to terminate her pregnancy, and her 1992 decision in Family planning c. Casey, who supported the deer decision.

Judge Samuel Alito, author of the majority opinion, wrote: “We submit that deer and Casey must be cancelled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and this right is not implicitly protected by any constitutional provision, including the one on which the defenders of deer and Casey now rely primarily on the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Wendell Griffin

In New York State Rifles and Pistols Association vs. Bruenthe same six-judge majority struck down a New York law that required anyone wishing to carry a handgun in public to prove they had a “good reason” for doing so, finding the law violated the right to bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment, which made the Second Amendment applicable to the states.

In the majority opinion, Judge Clarence Thomas wrote, “With the exception of a few outlier jurisdictions in the late 19th century, American governments simply have not widely banned the public carrying of firearms commonly used for personal defense. Nor have they generally required responsible, law-abiding citizens to “demonstrate a special need for self-protection distinct from that of the community at large” in order to bear arms in public.”

Judge Thomas made the assertion in the face of more than a century of state regulation — in New York and elsewhere in the United States — regarding who can carry guns in public and for what purposes.

In West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, the six-judge majority said the Environmental Protection Agency does not have the authority to enact a rule to regulate carbon dioxide emission standards under Section 111 of the federal Environmental Quality Act. the air. The EPA issued a Clean Power Plan regulation in 2015 under the Obama administration. Its implementation was suspended (i.e. prevented from taking effect) by the Supreme Court in 2016.

Under the Trump administration, the EPA repealed the Clean Power Plan in 2019 and enacted a different rule called the Affordable Clean Power Rule. When the Trump-era repeal and ACE Rule were challenged in federal court by multiple states and private parties, the United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit overturned the Trump administration’s repeal. of the Clean Power Plan and the ACE Rule and referred the matter to the EPA for further review.

After the Biden administration took office, the EPA requested — and no other party objected — that the court’s mandate on the Clean Power Plan be suspended while the EPA considers issuing a statement. new rule regulating carbon dioxide emission limits. Despite the fact that the Court of Appeals granted the motion to stay its decision rescinding the Clean Energy Plan and despite the EPA’s explicit statement that it would not implement the Clean Energy Plan but would develop a different settlement, Chief Justice John Roberts and five other justices (Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett) argued that Congress did not authorize the EPA in the Clean Air Act to determine “the best system for reducing emissions”. emissions” identified in the Clean Power Plan. In doing so, the judges ruled that the EPA had no authority to regulate the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions, even though there was no existing controversy.

And like the Guardian log correctly reported on June 27 that the same six-judge majority overturned decades of constitutional law regarding the separation of church and state and achieved one of the Christian right’s longest-standing goals: the return official Christian prayer in public schools by its decision in Kennedy vs. Bremerton School District.

Joseph Kennedy in a photo provided by his law firm, First Liberty Institute.

As with the West Virginia vs. EPA decision, this case had a strange journey all the way to the Supreme Court. He was filed in 2015 by Joseph Kennedy, who previously worked as a football coach at a public high school in suburban Seattle. Kennedy sued the school district that once employed him and alleged he had been the victim of religious discrimination after the school objected to his habit of giving public and ostentatious Christian prayers on the 50-yard line during football matches, surrounded by young athletes.

Kennedy lost at the district and circuit levels. He moved to Florida in 2019. That would normally have rendered his case moot. However, the Supreme Court still agreed to hear his case. Then, six of the nine judges ruled in his favour.

One word sums up these decisions and the worrying state of mind of the six conservative judges whose thinking produced them.

One word sums up these stops and the disturbing state of mind of the six conservative judges whose thought produced them: Bork, as in Robert Bork.

Robert Bork was a prominent Yale law professor who became United States Solicitor General at the Department of Justice and served as Solicitor General when the Watergate scandal came to light. After Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox asked President Richard Nixon to produce the audio tapes of his conversations in the Oval Office, Nixon ordered U.S. Attorney General Elliot Richardson to fire Cox. Richardson refused to do so and resigned. His chief deputy, Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus, also resigned because he considered Nixon’s order to fire Cox to be “fundamentally wrong.” Then Nixon ordered Bork, as acting attorney general, to fire Cox. Bork fired him, said he intended to resign after doing so, but Nixon talked him out of resigning.

US President Ronald W. Reagan speaks during a press conference while standing with his Supreme Court nominee Robert H. Bork. (Photo by Diana Walker/Getty Images)

Bork was later nominated and confirmed as a federal judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the DC Circuit), where he served from 1982 to 1988. In 1987, President Ronald Reagan nominated Bork to the Supreme Court.

Bork’s nomination was opposed by civil rights groups based on his views on civil rights. As a law professor and as a federal appellate judge, Bork was a fierce critic of Supreme Court rulings on the First Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment, and federal power. Bork opposed the right to privacy. He opposed the Roe vs. Wade decision. Upon his appointment as Solicitor General, Bork supported the right of Southern states to impose a poll tax. He opposed the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and criticized the 1965 Supreme Court decision in Griswold v. Connecticut, which struck down an 1873 Connecticut law banning the use of contraceptives for married couples. Bork’s nomination was defeated in the U.S. Senate by a vote of 42 to 58. He subsequently resigned from the bench and spent the rest of his life as a prominent law professor and conservative thinker.

Opponents of racial justice, women’s rights, First Amendment guarantees of separation of church and state, and protection of the media and individuals from government censorship, right-wing Christian nationalists and Free market fundamentalists have worked since the landmark Supreme Court decision in 1954 in Brown v. Board of Education for the moment.

“The defeat of Bork’s nomination led to what became the Federalist Society, and the current conservative majority on the Supreme Court reflects Bork’s legal and social philosophy.”

Robert Bork was appointed to begin reversing the civil rights advances that occurred during Earl Warren’s time as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The defeat of Bork’s nomination led to what became the Federalist Society, and the current conservative majority on the Supreme Court reflects Bork’s legal and social philosophy. Since the defeat of Bork’s nomination, conservatives have worked to advance his thinking on the meaning of justice and the role of courts and judges. They were disappointed when Judge Anthony Kennedy voted to keep the Roe vs. Wade decision and later when he confirmed this decision in Family planning c. Casey.

Pastor Graylan Ellis-Hagler speaks at a rally for the rejection of Robert H. Bork as Supreme Court Justice. (Photo by Steve Liss/Getty Images)

However, recent Supreme Court rulings show that Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barratt are cut off from Bork’s mindset. They and other federal judges appointed by Presidents Reagan, George H. Bush, George W. Bush, and Donald Trump are Bork’s right-wing followers in the Federalist Society.

Bork explains why Mitch McConnell blocked President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. They hoped the next president would be a Republican who would appoint someone like Bork.

Bork explains why supposedly evangelical Christian conservatives supported a sociopath and idiot named Donald Trump with such enthusiasm in 2016.

“Bork explains why so-called evangelical Christian conservatives backed a sociopath and idiot named Donald Trump with such enthusiasm in 2016.”

Bork explains why McConnell and his Republican Senate cronies worked so hard to get Brett Kavanaugh confirmed after Trump nominated Kavanaugh when Justice Kennedy retired, and why they didn’t want a serious investigation into the allegations about his rude behavior.

Bork explains why McConnell rushed to have Amy Coney Barratt confirmed in the weeks leading up to the November 2020 presidential election.

These lawyers have waited their entire careers to make court decisions that Bork would have made. Unless the current composition of the Supreme Court undergoes a drastic change, it will use the coming years to continue to do so, much to the chagrin and chagrin of those who suffer injustice.

Welcome to the Bork era.

Wendell Griffin is an Arkansas circuit judge and pastor of New Millennium Church in Little Rock, Ark.

Related Articles:

A radical court on the move | Analysis by Stan Hastey

This Supreme Court’s dangerous view of ‘history and tradition’ | Analysis by Robert P. Jones

Supreme Court once again awards conservative evangelicals victory for free speech over state establishment of religion

Church and state separatists join Justice Sotomayor in lambasting Supreme Court ruling in Maine school voucher case


Source link

About The Author

Related Posts