The disasters just keep coming from the Supremes. Today's joke: you can desegregate schools, but you're not allowed to consider race while you're doing it.
(By the way, I don't agree with Newman's opinion of the Court in general at all, and I'd love to see him substantiate it. I'd particularly enjoy watching him demonstrate that Brown, Loving, Griswold, Roe, Casey, Lawrence are coming down on the worst side of civil liberties. It's pretty much a no-brainer: it's not the court as an institution that is a problem, but the tendency to appoint ideologically driven justices, which BushCo has taken to an extreme, as it has everything else that might damage the country's basic institutions.)
M. J. Rosenberg has this comment:
In the meantime, the rightwing juggernaut will continue. There is no way to know where it will end now that the right has even gone after desegregation. Repeal child labor laws? Minimum wage? Environmental regulation?
Mark it down. This week was a real turning point in the country's history. The stealing of the 2000 election has now achieved results that, even the most paranoid among us, would never have imagined. Thanks, Ralph Nader.
If you want a pretty scary vision of what we're in for, note this:
In one full term, this Court has severely curbed local efforts to promote racial diversity in schools, upheld a right-wing ban on a necessary medical procedure for women, curbed students' free speech rights, crippled Congress' ability to keep corporate money out of political advertising, prevented taxpayers from challenging the constitutionality of Bush's faith-based initiatives, made it almost impossible for women to prevail on claims of longterm sex discrimination . . . and they're just getting started.
Update:
Some analysis of the desegregation decision at Balkinization, by Jim Ryan, Jack Balkin, and Mark Graber. Orrin Kerr at Volokh links to other commentaries.
No comments:
Post a Comment