![]() The two rulings restricting the EPA’s authority, taken together, prompted the liberal justice Elena Kagan to remark caustically that the majority had appointed itself “the national decision maker on environmental policy”. A taste of what may be to come was given last week when, for the second time in a year, the rightwing justices delivered a blow to the ability of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to combat pollution. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.ĭespite the court’s shaky hold on public opinion, the conservatives show no sign of letting up. For more information see our Privacy Policy. Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. ![]() The court has been battered recently by ethics scandals over Clarence Thomas’s acceptance of luxury holidays from a billionaire real estate developer and Gorsuch’s sale of a property to the head of a law firm that has business before the court.Įven before those stories broke, surveys show that confidence in the justices was falling sharply. The six conservative justices will drop their affirmative action bombshell at a time when the supreme court is already struggling to hold on to public trust. “So the supreme court ruling could obliterate the consideration of race in admissions for every single higher education institution in the country.” “All institutions that receive federal funding – and that’s all of them – are implicated,” Grove said. In this case, Harvard, a private university, has been challenged under the remit of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act which outlaws employment discrimination based on race and other factors. Past affirmative action challenges have tended to focus on state universities and colleges, but this time private ones are also under the spotlight. ![]() The challenges were brought by the conservative group Students for Fair Admissions, which says it wants to restore “color-blind principles” in how student bodies are chosen. ![]() Should the supermajority strike down affirmative action it would overturn 50 years of established practice – a chilling echo of its evisceration of half a century of settled law on abortion.ĭemonstrators rally in support of abortion rights at the US supreme court in Washington DC on 15 April 2023. Top of the pile of decisions being awaited with bated breath relates to the pair of challenges to the race-conscious admissions policies of Harvard and the University of North Carolina. “I’m surprised that the supreme court is doing so much so quickly – in the past there have been institutionalists at the court who have put the brakes on,” said Tara Grove, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin. Yet for the second year running, the new six-to-three rightwing supermajority – forged by Donald Trump with his appointments of Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett – appears to be preparing for another volcanic June. The pattern in previous courts has been for historic years to be followed by a period of relative calm before the next jolt strikes. Seasoned observers of the court have been taken aback by how determined the rightwing justices appear to crack on with their radical agenda. Twelve months later, the dust from that eruption has barely settled over the court as the country finds itself bracing once again for another epic month of seismic judicial interventions. Those metal barriers were a visible indication of how polarizing the nation’s highest court had become, with the devastating leak of the draft ruling in Dobbs v Jackson followed in June by the ruling itself which abolished the right to an abortion. It will be a stark contrast from last year, when the pillared chamber was empty amid Covid measures while the building was entirely walled off with security fences as a defense against protesters. For the first time since the pandemic struck in 2020 the justices, dressed in their customary black robes, will appear in person to read out the opinions – as well as potentially some blistering dissents from the three liberal members.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |