US supreme court

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Ketanji Brown Jackson’s nomination is rare moment of celebration for Biden

      by

      Ketanji Brown Jackson’s nomination is rare moment of celebration for BidenBiden is embattled on all fronts – from a stalled domestic agenda to international order – but a supreme court pick is an enduring act Two years ago exactly, Joe Biden stood on a debate stage in Charleston, South Carolina, his candidacy on the ropes, and made a promise: if elected president, he would nominate the first Black woman to the supreme court.Days later, Biden won the South Carolina primary on the strength of his support among Black voters. The victory propelled him to the Democratic nomination and then to the presidency. Last month, Justice Stephen Breyer announced his retirement, presenting Biden with an opportunity to fulfill that campaign commitment.Ketanji Brown Jackson: who is Biden’s supreme court choice?Read moreOn Friday, Biden stood before a podium in the White House’s Cross Hall to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to supreme court, declaring that the highest court in the land should reflect “the full talent and greatness of our nation”.If eventually confirmed by the senate, she will be the first Black woman to serve on the supreme court in its 232-year history.It was a rare moment of celebration for Biden, embattled on nearly every front. His once hugely ambitious domestic agenda is stalled, perhaps permanently; the Democrats’ tenuous control of Congress faces historic headwinds in this year’s midterm elections; and the international order that Biden spent much of his political career defending faces its gravest threat in decades after the Russian invasion of Ukraine.But the nomination of a supreme court justice is one of the most enduring acts of any president’s legacy. And for Biden, it is particularly resonant.Biden has said that he hopes the diversity he has brought to the federal government will be long-lasting. After serving as the vice-president to the nation’s first Black president, he chose Kamala Harris to be his running mate, which led her to become the first Black and Asian American woman to serve as vice-president.His cabinet is the most diverse in US history. And in his first year, Biden nominated a record number of district and appeals court judges from a range of racial, ethnic, geographical and legal backgrounds.Black voters, and Black women especially, were the driving force behind Biden’s nomination and his presidency. According to exit polls in 2020, Black women were his most loyal supporters, with 90% casting their ballots for him.In January 2021, Black female organizers in Georgia helped Democrats win two Senate runoff elections, cementing the party’s control of the chamber and delivering to Biden narrow but meaningful congressional majorities.Yet Biden has failed to enact much of his racial justice agenda. Democrats failed to overcome a Republican filibuster of voting rights legislation, designed to combat the raft of restrictive voting laws being enacted by conservative legislatures across the country. Attempts at policing reform sputtered last year, while the economic provisions of his Build Back Better agenda intended to combat soaring income inequality remain stalled in the Senate amid opposition from his own party.In that sense, Jackson’s nomination is a rare opportunity for Biden to make good on a promise to Black women.Democrats alone could confirm Jackson to the supreme court, with Harris breaking the tie. When Jackson was confirmed to the appeals court last year, she won the support of three Republican senators. But one of them, Senator Lindsey Graham, already criticized her nomination, saying it was a sign that the “radical left has won President Biden over yet again”.But for many, and especially for Black women, Jackson’s nomination, at the end of Black History Month, was a moment of vindication and pride.“She is eminently qualified to serve our nation on our highest court,” said Harris, a former federal prosecutor. “And while she will be the first Black woman on the supreme court, Judge Jackson will not be the last.”Barack Obama, who nominated Jackson to serve as a district court judge in Washington DC, said the judge had “already inspired young Black women like my daughters to set their sights higher and her confirmation will help them believe they can be anything they want to be”.In a statement announcing his decision to nominate Jackson, Biden recalled a formative exchange between a teenage Jackson and her high school guidance counselor.When Jackson, the daughter of public school teachers whose parents grew up in the segregated south, told her counselor that she wanted to attend Harvard, the counselor warned her that she should not set her expectations “so high”.“That didn’t stop Judge Jackson,” Biden said. Jackson graduated at the top of her class from Harvard College, then attended Harvard Law School, where she excelled as an editor of the Harvard Law Review.Now, she is poised to make history as a supreme court justice.TopicsKetanji Brown JacksonJoe BidenUS supreme courtUS politicsLaw (US)analysisReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Historic day’: Democrats praise Biden supreme court pick Ketanji Brown Jackson

      by

      ‘Historic day’: Democrats praise Biden supreme court pick Ketanji Brown JacksonSome Republicans are less enthused, claiming that race and gender shouldn’t play a role in the nomination Democrats enthusiastically welcomed Joe Biden’s supreme court nominee, Ketanji Brown Jackson, who if confirmed would serve as the first Black woman on the United States’ highest court.As reactions poured in from both sides of the political aisle, Barack Obama shared his congratulations about the news of Jackson’s nomination.Biden confirms he will nominate Ketanji Brown Jackson to supreme court – liveRead more“I want to congratulate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson on her nomination to the Supreme Court,” said Obama in a statement. “Judge Jackson has already inspired young Black women like my daughters to set their sights higher, and her confirmation will help them believe they can be anything they want to be.”The Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, shared his support via Twitter: “With her exceptional qualifications, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson will be a Justice who will uphold the constitution and protect the rights of all Americans, including the voiceless and vulnerable.”Senate majority whip Dick Durbin of Illinois, who is also chair of the Senate judiciary committee, also praised Jackson’ selection. He said: “To be the first to make history in our nation you need to have an exceptional life story. Judge Jackson’s achievements are well known to the Senate judiciary committee as we approved her to the DC circuit less than a year ago with bipartisan support. We will begin immediately to move forward on her nomination with the careful, fair, and professional approach she and America are entitled to.”South Carolina representative James Clyburn, who helped get Biden to make a pledge for a Black woman supreme court nominee, also celebrated Jackson’s nomination, writing in a statement: “Ketanji Brown Jackson, an outstanding judge on the DC circuit court of appeals, has been nominated by president Joe Biden to become the first African American woman on the US supreme court. This is a glass ceiling that took far too long to shatter, and I commend President Biden for taking a sledgehammer to it. I congratulate Judge Jackson and offer my full support during the confirmation process and beyond.”“This is a historic day for women, for BIPOC representation, and for our Judiciary,” tweeted Florida representative and co-chair of the Democratic Women’s Caucus Lois Frankel.Progressive Massachusetts representative Ayanna Pressley also added her voice, tweeting: “Bold. Principled. Qualified. Dedicated to justice. POTUS has met the moment with the historic nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson and we must have swift confirmation.”“233 years. That’s how long we have waited to have a Black woman nominated to the supreme court,” wrote Missouri representative Cori Bush about Jackson’s nomination. “There are no words to describe how my soul is moved by witnessing her nomination.”Progressive advocacy groups similarly shared their congratulations.“We need a justice on the bench who will uphold reproductive freedom. This historic nomination is a chance to shape the court for decades to come,” tweeted the pro-choice group Naral Pro-Choice, alluding to important abortion cases that the supreme court has heard recently, including the Texas abortion ban and an upcoming case that will decide the fate of Roe v Wade.Some Republicans seemed notably less joyous about Jackson’s nomination, following on their complaints that race and gender should not play a role in the selection process despite similar commitments from past Republican presidents.“If media reports are accurate, and Judge Jackson has been chosen as the supreme court nominee to replace Justice Breyer, it means the radical Left has won President Biden over yet again,” tweeted South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham, adding that Democrats potentially blocked the nomination of Judge J Michelle Childs.Childs, a judge in the US district court for the district of South Carolina, had notable bipartisan support from her state’s congressional delegation due to her non-Ivy league education and judicial reputation. But she had less support from some progressives, who questioned her work at a private law firm defending employers accused of race and gender discrimination as well as sexual harassment.Graham previously voted to confirm Jackson to the DC circuit court last June.In his statement, Clyburn, a close Biden ally, also acknowledged Childs as a potential Biden pick, writing: “Although not the finalist, Judge Childs’ inclusion among the three that were interviewed continues her record of remarkable contributions to making this country’s greatest accessible and affordable for all. And, she continues to make all South Carolinians proud.”Senator Susan Collins of Maine, another Republican senator who confirmed Jackson to the DC circuit court, also released a statement on Jackson’s nomination, writing: “Ketanji Brown Jackson is an experienced federal judge with impressive academic and legal credentials. I will conduct a thorough vetting of Judge Jackson’s nomination and look forward to her public hearing before the Senate judiciary committee and to meeting with her in my office.”Republican senator Mitt Romney of Utah, a potential yes vote for Jackson’s nomination, also released a statement on her selection: “One of my most serious constitutional responsibilities as a senator is to provide advice and consent on a supreme court nomination, and I believe our next justice must faithfully apply the law and our constitution – impartially and regardless of policy preferences.“Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson is an experienced jurist, and I know her historic nomination will inspire many. I look forward to meeting in person with Judge Jackson, thoroughly reviewing her record and testimony, and evaluating her qualifications during this process.”TopicsKetanji Brown JacksonUS supreme courtLaw (US)US politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden nominates Ketanji Brown Jackson to become first Black woman on supreme court

      by

      Biden nominates Ketanji Brown Jackson to become first Black woman on supreme courtWhite House praises ‘exceptionally qualified nominee’Jackson, if confirmed, will replace retiring Stephen Breyer Joe Biden on Friday nominated Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the supreme court, seeking to elevate a Black woman to the nation’s highest court for the first time in its 232-year history.Biden’s decision to nominate Jackson to succeed Justice Stephen Breyer, 83, for whom she clerked, sets up a fierce confirmation battle in the deeply partisan and evenly-divided Senate. Breyer, the most senior jurist in the court’s three-member liberal wing, will retire at the end of the court’s current session this summer.Speaking from the Cross Hall of the White House, the president introduced the 51-year-old judge to the nation as “the daughter of former public school teachers” and a “proven consensus-builder” who has displayed “a pragmatic understanding that the law must work for the American people”.Ketanji Brown Jackson: who is Biden’s supreme court choice?Read moreHer nomination comes exactly two years to the day after Biden, struggling miserably in his third campaign for the presidency, vowed to nominate a Black woman to the supreme court if elected president.“For too long, our government, our courts, haven’t looked like America,” Biden said, flanked by Jackson and vice-president Kamala Harris, the first Black and Asian American woman to serve as vice president, whom the president said was influential in helping him make this consequential decision. “I believe it’s time that we have a court that reflects the full talents and greatness of our nation.”Jackson, who was widely considered a frontrunner for the nomination,sits on the powerful US court of appeals for the DC circuit, after winning bipartisan approval during her Senate confirmation last year, when Biden elevated her from the federal district court in the District of Columbia.Born in the nation’s capital and raised in Miami, Jackson clerked for Breyer during the supreme court’s 1999-2000 term. She is a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School, an elite background that matches the resumes of several justices on the supreme court but which Republicans have sought to paint her as out-of-touch.In Jackson, Biden said he found a nominee who shared a “uniquely accomplished and wide ranging background” as the justice she would replace if confirmed. In her remarks, Jackson praised the retiring justice for exemplifying “civility, grace, pragmatism and generosity of spirit”.“Members of the Senate will decide if I fill your seat,” she said. “But please know that I could never fill your shoes.”Across her broad legal career, Jackson worked as a public defender, an experience that sets her apart from most judges sitting on the federal bench. She previously served as vice-chair of the US Sentencing Commission, where she focused on reducing sentencing disparities as part of the agency’s work setting sentencing guidelines in federal criminal cases.In its statement, the White House said Biden sought a nominee “who is wise, pragmatic, and has a deep understanding of the constitution as an enduring charter of liberty”.It added: “The president sought an individual who is committed to equal justice under the law and who understands the profound impact that the supreme court’s decisions have on the lives of the American people.”Jackson’s confirmation would not affect the ideological composition of the court, controlled by a conservative super-majority of six justices, including three appointed by Donald Trump, but it does secure a liberal seat on the bench probably for decades to come.The opportunity to name a justice to the supreme court is a welcome bright spot for the president, whose approval ratings have fallen to record lows as he confronts myriad crises at home and abroad. It is also his most significant opportunity yet to shape the federal judiciary, which remains overwhelmingly white and male. In his first year, Biden nominated a record number of district and appeals court judges from a range of racial, ethnic, geographical and legal backgrounds.When Breyer announced his retirement in January, Biden vowed to nominate a jurist with “extraordinary qualifications, character, experience and integrity”. And, reaffirming his campaign pledge, he added “that person will be the first Black woman ever nominated to the United States supreme court.”Urged by congressman Jim Clyburn of South Carolina ahead of his state’s primary, Biden made the pledge during a debate. Days later, with Clyburn’s endorsement, Black voters lifted Biden to a resounding victory in the South Carolina primary that set in motion a string of successes that ultimately earned him the nomination and later the White House.The promise divided Republican senators, some of whom argued that race or gender shouldn’t play a role in the selection process, despite similar commitments from Republican presidents Ronald Reagan and Trump.Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill have said they intend to move forward quickly with the confirmation process.Senate leader Chuck Schumer said: “The historic nomination of Judge Jackson is an important step toward ensuring the supreme court reflects the nation as a whole. As the first Black woman supreme court justice in the court’s 232-year-history, she will inspire countless future generations of young Americans.”Schumer added: “With her exceptional qualifications and record of evenhandedness, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson will be a Justice who will uphold the constitution and protect the rights of all Americans, including the voiceless and vulnerable.”Jackson has successfully navigated the Senate confirmation process on three occasions, winning support from both parties each time. But nothing compares to the glare of a supreme court nomination hearing. Already, her nomination is being met with resistance from Republicans.South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham, one of the three Republicans who voted to confirm her to the court considered the second highest in the land in 2021, said her nomination suggested the “radical left has won President Biden over yet again”.He had expressed a preference for J Michelle Childs, a US district judge in his home state of South Carolina.Ketanji Brown Jackson’s nomination is rare moment of celebration for BidenRead moreUnlike for most major pieces of legislation, Democrats can confirm Jackson with their 50 votes and Harris breaking the tie.If confirmed, Jackson would become the sixth woman to serve on the court and only the third Black justice, both men. They are Clarence Thomas, a conservative who was appointed in 1991 and is still serving, and Thurgood Marshall, the first African American supreme court justice.It will be the first supreme court confirmation hearing for a Democratic president since Elena Kagan was nominated by Barack Obama 12 years ago. Republicans refused to hold a hearing for Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland, which further poisoned what has become scorched-earth affairs.On the appellate court, Jackson served in the seat held by Garland, after he became the attorney general.But there are already early signs that this confirmation may be different, as Republicans weigh how aggressively to confront Biden’s nominee, particularly when it will not affect the balance of the court.With their agenda stalled and the president unpopular, Democrats are hopeful the nomination will energize their base as they brace for a political backlash in this year’s midterm elections.Closing her remarks, Jackson acknowledged the historic nature of her nomination by noting an “interesting coincidence”: she shares a birthday with Constance Baker Motley, the first Black woman to become a federal judge.“Today, I proudly stand on Judge Motley’s shoulders, sharing not only her birthday, but also her steadfast and courageous commitment to equal justice under law,” Jackson said.And if confirmed, she concluded, “I can only hope that my life and career, my love of this country and the constitution and my commitment to upholding the rule of law and the sacred principles upon which this great nation was founded, will inspire future generations of Americans.”TopicsKetanji Brown JacksonUS supreme courtLaw (US)US politicsJoe BidenBiden administrationnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden interviews three Black women as potential supreme court picks – reports

      by

      Biden interviews three Black women as potential supreme court picks – reportsThe White House is urging liberal groups to support nominees against critics’ attacks, CNN reports Joe Biden has interviewed at least three potential supreme court nominees and is expected to reveal his decision by the end of this month, according to multiple sources close to the president.Ketanji Brown Jackson, Leondra Kruger and J. Michelle Childs – all Black women – were among the contenders who spoke with the president, those familiar with the matter told CNN and the Washington Post.Jackson, who has widely been considered the frontrunner, currently sits on the US court of appeals for the DC circuit after replacing the attorney general, Merrick Garland, in June 2021.Kruger is an associate justice of the California supreme court and has served as the acting principal deputy solicitor general under the Barack Obama administration.Childs currently sits on the US district court for the district of South Carolina and was previously nominated by Biden for a seat on the DC circuit court of appeals.The impending retirement of supreme court associate justice Stephen Breyer has given Biden has the opportunity to fulfill one of his campaign promises: to appoint a Black woman to the supreme court.On Sunday evening Cedric L Richmond, director of the White House office of public engagement, told members of the organization Win With Black Women that “we’re close”.“We know what some of the attacks are going to be: not qualified, affirmative action pick… Well, it wasn’t ‘affirmative action pick’ when we just picked friends, white friends of the president, for all these decades. You know, it was just patronage or whatever they wanted to call it,” Richmond said, according to a source who has direct knowledge of the private conference call.Biden, who is dealing with a growing crisis between Ukraine and Russia, has set the end of February as his deadline to pick a nominee. According to CNN, White House officials have reached out to liberal groups to inform them that Biden will not be shifting from his timeline and urged them to support “top tier” candidates against critics’ attacks.In a statement on Tuesday, Andrew Bates, a White House spokesperson, said Biden has not yet made a decision.“The President has not yet chosen a nominee. He continues to evaluate eminently qualified individuals in the mold of Justice [Stephen] Breyer who have the strongest records, intellect, character, and dedication to the rule of law that anyone could ask for – and all of whom would be deserving of bipartisan support. He looks forward to announcing a nominee this month.”TopicsUS supreme courtBiden administrationLaw (US)US politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Cruz: Biden promise to put Black woman on supreme court is racial discrimination

      by

      Cruz: Biden promise to put Black woman on supreme court is racial discriminationJustices have been chosen on grounds of identity before, as Trump did when he picked a woman to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg The Republican senator Ted Cruz complained on Sunday that Joe Biden’s promise to nominate a Black woman to the supreme court was an instance of racial discrimination – but also claimed the GOP would not drag the eventual nominee “into the gutter” in confirmation hearings.The US supreme court is letting racist discrimination run wild in the election system | Carol AndersonRead more“Democrats today believe in racial discrimination,” Cruz told Fox News Sunday. “They’re they’re committed to it as a political proposition. I think it is wrong to stand up and say, ‘We’re going to discriminate.’”Biden made his promise on the campaign trail in 2020. Stephen Breyer, the oldest justice on the court, announced his retirement last month.James Clyburn, the South Carolina congressman and House whip, was instrumental in securing Biden’s promise. He has pushed for the nomination of J Michelle Childs, a judge from his state who has also attracted support from Lindsey Graham, like Cruz an influential Republican on the Senate judiciary committee.Childs is reported to be on a short list of three.“This administration is going to discriminate,” Cruz insisted. “What the president said is that only African American women are eligible for this slot, that 94% of Americans are ineligible.”The Texas senator’s host, Bill Hemmer, did not point out that justices have been chosen on grounds of identity before.The last Republican president, Donald Trump, promised to pick a woman to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg, then did so when the liberal lion died in September 2020. Cruz championed the nominee, Amy Coney Barrett, a hardline Catholic conservative.As a result of Trump’s three picks, conservatives outnumber liberals on the court 6-3. The replacement of Breyer, which could be Biden’s sole nomination if Republicans win back the Senate, will not alter that balance.Cruz is an accomplished conservative provocateur. On Sunday, he chose a provocative example of a jurist who he said would not qualify for consideration by Biden: Merrick Garland.“Merrick Garland, whom Barack Obama nominated to the supreme court, was told, ‘Sorry, you’re the wrong skin color and wrong gender, you’re not eligible to be considered.’”Garland is now attorney general, and thus unlikely to be considered for a supreme court seat in any eventuality.Furthermore, Cruz was among Senate Republicans who were not sorry to block even a hearing for Garland when he was nominated to replace Antonin Scalia in early 2016, claiming the conservative died too close to an election for a replacement to be considered.Cruz was also among Republicans who were not sorry to replace Ginsburg with Coney Barrett less than two months before the 2020 election.The Texas senator also said he would consider Biden’s nominee “on the record and I’m confident the Senate judiciary committee will have a vigorous process examining that nominee’s record. And what I can tell you right now is we’re not going to do what the Democrats did with Brett Kavanaugh.”Kavanaugh faced accusations of sexual assault, which he vehemently denied. Democratic failed to block his confirmation.“We’re not going to go into the gutter,” Cruz said. “We’re not going to engage in personal slime and attacks. We’re going to focus on the nominee’s record on substance and what kind of justice she would make. And that’s the constitutional responsibility of the Senate.”TopicsUS supreme courtTed CruzRepublicansUS politicsLaw (US)RacenewsReuse this content More

    • 213 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      The US supreme court is letting racist discrimination run wild in the election system | Carol Anderson

      by

      The US supreme court is letting racist discrimination run wild in the election systemCarol AndersonThe court has approved or tolerated massive voter roll purges, extreme gerrymandering and election laws that have a disparate impact on minorities The US supreme court, in a 5-4 decision, used the ruse that it was too close to an election – three months away – to scrap a racially discriminatory, Republican-drawn legislative map in Alabama. A lower court had previously ruled against the state because its gerrymandered congressional districts diluted the voting strength of African Americans by ensuring that 27% of Alabama’s population would garner only 14% of the state’s congressional representation. But that reality didn’t faze five justices; the US supreme court was just fine with letting a policy designed to disfranchise Black voters unfurl and do its damage in an oncoming federal election.The echoes of a brutal past are resonating in this decision.After the civil war, Congress passed the 1867 Reconstruction Act, which provided that Black men had the right to vote, and then Congress followed that with the 15th amendment, which banned states from using race, color or previous conditions of servitude to undermine the right to vote.In a series of decisions in the late 19th and early to mid-20th centuries, however, the supreme court systematically dismantled those protections, as well as others crafted to support African Americans’ citizenship rights and defend against white domestic terrorism waged by the Ku Klux Klan and similar organizations. Focusing on voting rights gives some indication of how pernicious the decisions were. The 1874 Minor v Happersett ruling asserted that the right to vote was not part and parcel of American citizenship.In 1876, United States v Reese et al dealt with a Black man who was trapped in a malicious catch-22 that prevented him from voting. He tried to pay his poll tax, which was required to vote, but the tax collector refused to accept the payment and the registrars would not allow him to cast a ballot without payment. The court ruled, despite this crude and brazen denial of his right to vote, that the 15th amendment “does not confer the right of suffrage upon any one”.As states then began fully implementing Jim Crow legislation to disfranchise African Americans, the court, in the Williams v Mississippi (1898) decision, looked at the poll tax and the literacy test and ruled that those chokepoints to the ballot box – which had already removed 90% of registered Black voters in Mississippi from the rolls – did not violate the 15th amendment.In a 1903 case out of Alabama, Giles v Harris, the supreme court determined that it was powerless to stop a state from disfranchising Black voters even if the methods were unconstitutional.This assault on African Americans’ right to vote was an assault on American democracy aided and abetted by the highest court in the land. The results were devastating. By 1960, there were counties in Alabama that had no Black voters registered, while simultaneously having more than 100% of white age-eligible voters on the rolls. In Mississippi a mere 6.7% of eligible Black adults were registered to vote.It took the blood, the courage and the martyrdom of civil rights workers combined with the political spine of a president and congressional leaders to break this stranglehold on the right to vote. The legislature passed and President Lyndon Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act (VRA), which would save America from its worst self. And, this time, in the late 1960s, the US supreme court came down on the side of democracy and the 15th amendment. Two crucial decisions buttressed the VRA, noting that it was not only constitutional but also created to deal with “the subtle, as well as the obvious, state regulations which have the effect of denying citizens their right to vote because of race”.The Roberts court, however, bears no resemblance to the one in the 1960s and has all the anti-voting rights earmarks of the court after the civil war. The Roberts court’s assault on the VRA and the 15th amendment has been relentless and brutal to American democracy.The Shelby County v Holder (2013) decision ended the most powerful tool in the VRA’s wheelhouse, pre-clearance, and allowed states and jurisdictions with a demonstrated history of racial discrimination to implement laws and election policies without the prior approval of the US Department of Justice or the federal court in Washington DC.Within two hours of that decision, Texas implemented a voter ID law that led district court Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos to rule that the new measure not only had a discriminatory effect, it also had a discriminatory intent. The state appealed to the fifth circuit, pleading with the judges to not dismantle the voter ID law because it would be too disruptive to the looming midterm election in 2014.When the case reached the US supreme court, Justice Antonin Scalia’s majority ruled in favor of Texas without comment. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dissent, however, tore away at the state’s ruse that it was too close to the midterms to stop a racially discriminatory law in its tracks. The greatest threat to confidence in elections, she wrote, was to allow a “purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax and risks denying the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters” to be used in a federal election.But the majority on the US supreme court was fine with letting discrimination run wild in the election system.That has been abundantly clear in a number of voting rights cases that have come before the Roberts court since the Shelby County v Holder decision. Each one, whether massive voter roll purges in violation of the National Voter Registration Act, extreme partisan gerrymandered districts, or election laws that have a disparate impact on minorities, has been approved, either by acts of commission or omission, by the US supreme court.There are consequences.The very legitimacy of the court is at stake. Right now it’s as precariously perched as the right to vote and American democracy. Unfortunately, the Roberts court has played a major, horrific role in this preventable disaster.
      Carol Anderson is the Charles Howard Candler professor of African American studies at Emory University and the author of White Rage: The Unspoken Truth of Our Racial Divide and One Person, No Vote: How Voter Suppression is Destroying Our Democracy. She is a contributor to the Guardian
      TopicsUS politicsOpinionUS supreme courtLaw (US)US voting rightsRacecommentReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      National Archives reportedly asks DoJ to investigate Trump document handling

      by

      National Archives reportedly asks DoJ to investigate Trump document handlingRequest follows reports of Trump tearing up documents and sending boxes of files to Mar-a-Lago property The National Archives and Records Administration (Nara) has asked the justice department to investigate whether the former US president Donald Trump violated federal law in the handling of documents, the Washington Post has reported. The Associated Press was unable to independently confirm the report.The referral followed several Washington Post stories chronicling how Trump dealt with documents, including tearing them up. In one report, confirmed by the archives, the agency arranged the transport of 15 boxes of documents from the Mar-a-Lago property in Florida after Trump’s representatives discovered them and notified the archives.The Washington Post says the referral is asking the justice department to investigate whether Trump violated the Presidential Records Act, which requires that all presidential records of an administration be turned over to the National Archives when a president leaves office.The archives did not return multiple messages seeking comment. The justice department declined to comment. In a statement, Trump said: “Following collaborative and respectful discussions, the National Archives and Records Administration (Nara) arranged for the transport of boxes that contained presidential records in compliance with the Presidential Records Act” from Mar-a-Lago that will one day become part of the Donald J Trump presidential library.The media’s “characterisation of my relationship with Nara is fake news. It was exactly the opposite. It was a great honour to work with Nara to help formally preserve the Trump legacy,” said Trump.The archive acknowledged this week that Trump representatives had been cooperating with Nara and had located records “that had not been transferred to the National Archives at the end of the Trump administration”. Nara arranged for them to be transported to Washington. “Nara officials did not visit or raid the Mar-a-Lago property,” the agency said.Nara said the former president’s representatives are continuing to search for additional records that belong to the archives.In a separate statement, David S Ferriero, the archivist of the United States, said: “Whether through the creation of adequate and proper documentation, sound records management practices, the preservation of records, or the timely transfer of them to the National Archives at the end of an administration, there should be no question as to need for both diligence and vigilance. Records matter.”Supreme court rejects Trump bid to shield documents from January 6 panelRead moreThe issue of presidential records, the Trump administration and the archives has been central to the investigation by the House committee investigating the insurrection on 6 January that sought to stop the certification of the 2020 presidential election. Trump tried to withhold White House documents in a dispute that rose to the supreme court.In an 8-1 ruling last month, the court let stand a lower court ruling that said the archives could turn over documents, which include presidential diaries, visitor logs, speech drafts and handwritten notes dealing with 6 January from the files of the former chief of staff Mark Meadows. At the time, the House committee agreed to defer its attempt to retrieve some documents, at the request of the Biden administration.A referral for potential criminal prosecution from a federal agency or from Congress does not mean the justice department is likely to bring charges or that it will even investigate the matter.Questions about Trump’s handling of records date back to 2018, when Politico reported that Trump aides, fearing he might violate the law, routinely pieced together documents with tape because of his habit of tearing them up.TopicsDonald TrumpUS supreme courtUS justice systemNational ArchivesLaw (US)US politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden’s supreme court nomination decision: Politics Weekly Extra – podcast

      by

      As Republicans take aim at Joe Biden’s supreme court nominee … before he has even picked it, Jonathan Freedland and Joan Greve discuss who might replace associate justice Stephen Breyer

      How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know

      Subscribe to the Guardian’s brand new Weekend podcast, which will launch on Saturday. Send your questions and feedback to podcasts@theguardian.com. Help support the Guardian by going to gu.com/supportpodcasts. More