What Another Term Of Trump Would Mean For SCOTUS | It’s Black History Month, Why Clarence Thomas Shouldn’t Be Written Off
February 18, 2020
OUR BODIES OUR CHOICE
|Lawrence Hurley with Reuters reports on the “nervous wait” regarding the future of the Louisiana abortion clinic at the center of the upcoming Supreme Court case. He interviews young women who have sought abortions there, traveling from hours away to obtain the procedure — in both cases, for medical reasons. Hurley writes, “The Supreme Court’s ruling, expected by the end of June, could signal whether its 5-4 conservative majority, including two justices appointed by President Donald Trump, intends to make bold moves to curtail abortion rights. Anti-abortion activists are hoping the court will undermine and eventually overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that recognized a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion and legalized the procedure nationwide.”
WAY MORE THAN A TECHNICALITY
|“On March 24, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear one of the most momentous tech cases in decades. The outcome—depending on which participant you believe—will either safeguard future innovation or deal a deserved comeuppance to a lawless tech giant.” Jeff John Roberts with Fortune reports on the case of Google v. Oracle which concerns whether Google wrongly used Java programming to build its mobile Android software as Oracle alleges. “For its part, Google warns that an appeals court made a grievous mistake in ruling for Oracle and that, if the Supreme Court upholds the ruling, it would force companies to ask permission or pay every time they use the high-tech equivalent of a nut or a bolt.”
JUST IMAGINE
|What would a second term under PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP look like? The Editors of the Intelligencer say a second term would be felt most deeply thanks to the changes Trump could make to and through SCOTUS. “Trump’s judicial counterrevolution could happen most decisively in the Supreme Court. He quickly exploited two openings on SCOTUS, and, in a second Trump term, the odds of court liberals RUTH BADER GINSBURG (who will turn 87 this year and was recently treated for pancreatic cancer) and STEPHEN BREYER (who will be 82 this summer) hanging on until the next Democratic administration will go down significantly. One more flip of a liberal seat on the Court could produce a landmark conservative era in constitutional law, almost certainly including the reversal or significant modification of Roe v. Wade and other key precedents, not to mention a decisive new era of sympathy for corporations, reactionary state governments, nativists, vote suppressors, and foes of civil liberties.”
TOP-ED
|“Black History Month should be a celebration of African Americans who have helped transform our nation. Sadly, that is not the case.” Ken Blackwell writes in USA Today that it is wrong to exclude or ignore JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS and his role in American history and black history. Blackwell writes, “Thomas’s life trajectory, which took him from a broken family and brutal poverty in the segregated south to the United States Supreme Court — where he is now the longest serving justice — is exactly what we should celebrate this month and all year long. Every American, young and old regardless of race, should hear and learn from Thomas’ story of overcoming seemingly insurmountable obstacles all while maintaining his faith, his courage and his personal integrity. His life has been an inspiration to countless African-Americans like me, and that will be his legacy.”
NOT GIVING IN
|Following comments from JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBURG last week in which she said efforts to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment should start over, Russell Berman with The Atlantic interviewed Linda Coberly who heads the ERA Coalition’s legal task force. Coberly told Berman that although Ginsburg’s comments were “unfortunate,” the ERA Coalition isn’t giving up. Coberly said, “I wasn’t surprised to hear her express a preference for a new beginning, because she has said that before. She was asked a political question, not a legal one, which is, ‘What is your prognosis for an Equal Rights Amendment?’ And she expressed a preference for a new beginning because she fears there’s too much controversy right now in light of the time limit and what she refers to as the latecomers to ratification. And I have a lot of respect for that view, of the strategy and the political concern. But we [are] coming up on 50 years of effort behind ratification of this amendment, and with the House vote today, we are very close to resolving the issue. And I think it is worth seeing that process through.”
SO MUCH FOR PROGRESS
|Over the weekend, February 15 marked the anniversary of PRESIDENT RUTHERFORD B. HAYES signing a bill allowing female attorneys to argue cases before the Supreme Court. It’s worth noting that in October, Tony Mauro with The National Law Journal reported the number of female lawyers who argue before SCOTUS “is still bafflingly low.”
OKAY LADIES NOW LET'S GET IN FORMATION
|In a personal essay written as a part of a joint publication from 16 law schools that were celebrating having all women editors-in-chief for the first time, LISA BLATT offers advice for female lawyers on how they can succeed in law firms and in Supreme Court advocacy. Some of her advice includes: Stop looking for “your passion.” Focus on what you’re good at and work at a place that wants and needs you for a skill you have. “You will have more control over your work and schedule.” She also suggests that lawyers be unafraid of being direct writing, “Many colleagues have advised me not to go bold, but to play it safe in briefs or arguments. Thankfully, at key points in my career, I ignored them, and I do not regret it. To the extent I have regrets, I only wish I had stood my ground more often and told more people that they were idiots.” Marcia Coyle with The National Law Journal reports.
SCOTUS VIEWS
Clarence Thomas Breaks His Silence In Theaters Nationwide
The Hill“It’s a shame that ‘Created Equal’ didn’t get the big opening that a Michael Moore or Al Gore documentary might have received. Director Michael Pack delivers an engaging and emotional two hours — using movie clips and creative analogies such as an oyster boat trip — that would inspire many if it could get on more than two dozen screens nationwide.”
School Choice Logic Doesn’t Apply Here. Does The Supreme Court Get That?
The New York Times“Scrutinizing the avuncular sphinx Chief Justice John Roberts throughout the impeachment trial of President Trump, I kept wondering whether he will preserve or ransack the legacy of the framers we revere — framers like the Republican Betty Babcock and the Democrat Dorothy Eck. It’s the question on all Americans’ minds: Do Mr. Roberts and his eight co-workers fully appreciate the public-spirited grandeur of the winter of 1971-72, when 100 Montanans, including housewives, ministers, a veterinarian and a beekeeper, gathered at the state capital, Helena, for the constitutional convention, affectionately nicknamed the ‘Con Con’? The question haunts the current Supreme Court case Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue.”
Constitutional Rights Are Priceless—Someone Should Tell The 11th Circuit
The Hill“Nowhere is the attack on constitutionally protected freedoms more evident than on college campuses—the purported marketplace of ideas—where administrators and faculty are more concerned with protecting students from new ideas than encouraging learning and growth. This ‘snowflake culture’ is perpetuated by those in the rarified air of the ivory tower that leaves some university officials feeling they can do no wrong. That’s why my employer, Alliance Defending Freedom, filed a lawsuit two years ago on behalf of Chike Uzuegbunam and Joseph Bradford, two now-former students at Georgia Gwinnett College. And it’s why we have now asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take their case.”