Skip to main content

Amy and Barbara, You've Got the Power - Do You Have the Integrity?

Regarding the new crisis manufactured by our malevolent mischief-making President over replacing Justice Ginsburg, and his lie this morning that Ginsburg didn't dictate her dying wish to her granddaughter: We're all treating the likely nominees, Amy Coney Barrett and Barbara Lagoa, as silent puppets with no will of their own. It is being assumed that they will mindlessly accept the nomination if offered. Out of respect for a great woman justice and out of self-respect, I as a feminist expect them both to decline to become Trump pawns and to decline the nomination if offered before the election. This is why feminism has brought them to this crucial point in American history, made sure they could get into law school, and fought so they could practice law and rise to their high stations. They now have the opportunity to cut through the male power-maneuvers, amorality and lies and to demonstrate what real judicial integrity is, acting for the good of the country. I hope they speak as women for women.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Wow! What a Finish! The Gilead Court Guts US Women's Rights in a Neat Three-Play Touchdown in the Last Ten Seconds of the 2020 Term

Nobody ever said Team Gilead had bad coaching, and the team had brought in a new quarterback and tight end during the previous term. But Team Gilead surpassed all bets, rolling over Team Women in a surprise end-run in the last ten seconds before the season adjourned. A real play-by-play of the season-ender isn't available, because Team Gilead played it close to the chest and the commentary they put out about the plays (called "Opinions") is just a pile of bullshit. But we watched the game and noticed a few things: PLAY ONE: Bostock v Clayton County   Justice Roberts passed the ball to Justice Gorsuch and timeout was called for some judicial deliberation. Gorsuch huddled with Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh. He said Roberts was willing to let him use his pet Scalian method, and that Team Women would give up five yards for a "win" of any kind. The other three hated the idea, but Gorsuch promised Alito his dissent could be as long and droning as he wanted, a
Post a Comment
Read more

Chinks Where Women Can Hide in the Bostock Age to Come

This is a very early reaction to the question, What will be the implications for women as a class over the next ten or twenty years, of the US Supreme Court case holding in Bostock v. Clayton County (June 15, 2010)? Here is the holding of the Bostock case, in its simplest and most devastating form. The Court held:  "...it is impossible to discriminate against a person for being homosexual or transgender without discriminating against that individual based on sex. " The elevation of rights of LGB people to federal protection do not affect the rights of women to safety, privacy, and bodily sovereignty. But the elevation of transgender status to the protective sex category of Title VII of the US Civil Rights Act of 1964 (and, by implication and the rule of controlling cases, to all similarly-structured federal protective statutes as well as state statutes) does negatively affect women's rights. The problem with placing both the rights of transgender biological males
Post a Comment
Read more

The Limits of Textualism In the US Supreme Court's Bostock Decision

I'm becoming a fan of Pulitzer Prize winner Linda Greenhouse, a contributing opinion writer for the New York Times. The June 15 Bostock Opinion  written by Justice Neil Gorsuch shocked me for many reasons she touches on in the article below, which I'm pulling from its paywall and posting below. I agree especially with her assessment that Justice Gorsuch was more interested in self-aggrandizement than ideology of left or right; that "textualism" or "originalism" as a method of statutory construction is a sad diminishment of real judging and that the method allows for almost any decision to be made in any case. Neil Gorsuch decided the three associated cases, involving matters of huge moment for a large percentage of the American population, based on parsing the meaning of "because of sex" in the language of Title VII. He decided that phrase means "because of sex or anything necessarily related to sex", including the will o' the wisp
1 comment
Read more