For Obama, setbacks from a divided
Supreme Court
Send a link to a friend
[June 28, 2016]
By Lawrence Hurley
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme
Court breaks for the summer this week, having dealt high-profile
setbacks to President Barack Obama on issues important to his liberal
legacy, notably on immigration and climate change.
This will be the high court's last full nine-month term of the
Democratic president's administration. Obama leaves office in
January 2017.
The court was one shy of its full strength nine members much of this
term due to the death of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia on Feb.
13. His absence affected the outcome of some major cases. Four
cases, including the immigration dispute, ended in 4-4 splits that
left lower court rulings in place.
There was little Obama could do about it. Even if the Republican-led
U.S. Senate had accepted Obama's March 16 nomination of Judge
Merrick Garland to succeed Scalia, it was unlikely he would have
made it to the bench in time to hear the term's final round of
arguments in April.
Hoping their candidate wins the presidential election in November,
Republicans insist the choice of Scalia's successor should fall to
the next president.
The administration did score some major wins on abortion and other
social issues, but these were when it intervened in cases where it
was not directly involved.
IMMIGRATION LOSS
Obama's biggest loss came last Thursday on his bid to protect up to
four million immigrants from deportation. The 4-4 deadlock will keep
him from taking major action on immigration reform, a top policy
aim, before he leaves office.
In a second major blow to Obama's legacy, the court unexpectedly put
on hold sweeping federal regulations meant to curb carbon dioxide
emissions from power plants, the centerpiece of his administration's
climate change strategy..
That decision by a 5-4 vote, days before Scalia's death, effectively
put off a ruling on the regulation until after a legal challenge is
completed - sometime after the next president enters the White House
- and prevented the new regulations from being implemented.
On healthcare, the administration lost narrowly to Christian groups
that sought an exemption to a provision of his signature law known
as Obamacare requiring employers to provide health insurance
coverage for contraception.
The high court sent that dispute back to lower courts without
deciding the main legal issue, throwing out a series of rulings in
the government's favor.
The administration lost some other big cases in which it was
directly involved, including former Virginia Governor Robert
McDonnell's successful appeal of his corruption convictions.
FRIEND OF THE COURT
A silver lining for the administration came in cases where it lent
its support, as a friend of the court, to advocates for abortion
rights and for race-based university admissions to offset years of
discrimination.
[to top of second column] |
President Barack Obama delivers a statement after the Supreme Court
left in place a lower court ruling blocking his plan to spare
millions of illegal immigrants from deportation and give them work
permits at the White House in Washington, U.S., June 23, 2016.
REUTERS/Carlos Barria
Elizabeth Wydra, president of the liberal leaning Constitutional
Accountability Center, said Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, the
administration's top Supreme Court lawyer until he stepped down last
week, deserved some credit for the ruling on Monday striking down
tough abortion restrictions in Texas due to his performance during
the oral argument.
Last Thursday, the court upheld consideration of race as an
acceptable factor in admissions at the University of Texas. Had
Scalia lived, the court might have deadlocked 4-4 in that too.
One 4-4 decision went the administration's way. The government
supported unions that successfully fended off a conservative legal
challenge. The divided court left in place a lower court ruling in
favor of the unions.
With Scalia on the court, the conservative majority would likely
have struck down fees that many states force workers to pay unions
in lieu of dues to fund collective bargaining and other activities.
A loss for unions would have deprived unions representing teachers,
police, transit workers, firefighters and other government employees
of millions of dollars annually and diminished their political
clout.
The administration also scored a significant victory when the court
upheld an electricity-markets regulation that encourages big power
users like factories to cut consumption at peak times, rejecting a
challenge brought by electric utilities.
(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Howard Goller)
[© 2016 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2016 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |