After sharp right turn, U.S. Supreme Court conservatives step on the gas
Send a link to a friend
[September 28, 2022]
By Andrew Chung
(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court last
March rebuffed an emergency request by North Carolina Republicans to
allow the use in November's congressional elections of an electoral map
they drew that a lower court invalidated for unlawfully disadvantaging
Democrats.
It was a short-term setback for the North Carolina Republicans, but they
soon will get a chance to claim a bigger legal victory. Conservative
Justice Brett Kavanaugh suggested at the time that the justices take up
the underlying legal dispute, one that could provide state legislators
around the country the ability to enact election policies with less
judicial oversight - a Republican goal.
The Supreme Court in June announced it would hear the case in its new
term, which begins on Monday. This showed the increasing willingness of
its 6-3 conservative majority take on divisive issues as it steers the
court on a rightward path.
Following a term when its conservatives delivered blockbuster rulings
curtailing abortion access and widening gun rights, the court returns
from a summer recess ready to tackle more major cases. Potential rulings
in upcoming cases could end affirmative action policies used by colleges
and universities to increase campus racial diversity, hobble a federal
law called the Voting Rights Act and make it easier for businesses to
refuse service to LGBT people based on free-speech rights.
"The justices are taking things that are causing real conflicts around
the country, they're taking issues even if there's a lot of media
attention, even if it's a hot-button issue - and they're going to decide
it anyway," said Megan Wold, an attorney and former law clerk to
conservative Justice Samuel Alito.
The addition of three justices appointed by Republican former President
Donald Trump - Neil Gorsuch in 2017, Brett Kavanaugh in 2018 and Amy
Coney Barrett in 2020 - gave the court its current conservative
supermajority.
According to Irv Gornstein, executive director of Georgetown University
Law Center's Supreme Court Institute, Kavanaugh now wields outsized
influence over the speed and limits of the court's rightward shift.
Gornstein called Kavanaugh the "median justice."
He does not appear as far to the right as Justices Clarence Thomas,
Alito, Gorsuch and Barrett, while Chief Justice John Roberts - an
incrementalist conservative - and liberal Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia
Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson are to Kavanaugh's left.
Gornstein noted during a recent panel discussion in Washington that
Kavanaugh has taken to opining on the limits of the majority's rulings.
In the abortion decision, for instance, he issued a separate opinion
stating that interstate travel to obtain the procedure is
constitutional.
"Make no mistake, for now and for the foreseeable future, this is
Justice Kavanaugh's court," Gornstein said.
In its most recent term, there were 14 rulings decided on a 6-3 tally
with the conservative justices on one side and the liberals on the
other. That is up from 10 on strictly ideological lines the previous
term, according to legal scholar Adam Feldman, who tracks court data at
a website called "Empirical Scotus."
[to top of second column]
|
The U.S. Supreme Court stands in
Washington, U.S., February 6, 2022. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts/File
Photo
In the abortion decision, the court ruled 6-3 to uphold the
restrictive Mississippi law at issue, though Roberts opposed
outright overturning the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade precedent.
Similarly decided on 6-3 votes were the gun rights expansion, cases
from Maine and Washington state favoring religious rights and
another case that made it harder for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency to issue rules addressing climate change.
The court appears likely to continue to take up cases particularly
important to conservatives, Feldman said.
"They can look for cases that are going to be more ideological
because even the weakest link on the right is still pretty far to
the right," Feldman added.
MORE TRANSFORMATION
Further transformation in U.S. law appears likely this term. Two
cases could have profound implications for elections in 2024 and
beyond.
In the North Carolina case involving the Republican-drawn map of the
state's 14 U.S. House of Representatives districts, Republican
lawmakers are advocating for a legal theory gaining popularity among
conservatives that could restrict the power of state courts to
review actions by state legislatures concerning federal elections.
Endorsing the theory would undermine democratic norms, according to
critics, even as Republicans at the state level pursue restrictive
voting policies and electoral maps skewed in their favor.
Alabama in another case is defending its Republican-drawn map of the
state's seven U.S. House districts that a lower court struck down as
discriminatory against Black voters in violation of the 1965 Voting
Rights Act.
Also closely watched are cases involving race-conscious student
admissions programs used by Harvard University and the University of
North Carolina to foster campus racial diversity. A group led by an
anti-affirmative action activist challenged those policies as
unlawfully discriminatory against Asian American and white
applicants.
The court will hear an evangelical Christian web designer's free
speech claim that she cannot be forced under a Colorado
anti-discrimination law to produce websites for same-sex marriages.
The court did not resolve that issue in a 2018 ruling in favor of a
Christian Denver-area baker who refused on religious grounds to make
a wedding cake for a gay couple.
Other important cases could make it easier to build on property
deemed wetlands without needing a permit under the federal Clean
Water Act, or, in a case involving Taser-maker Axon Enterprise Inc,
to challenge the authority of federal regulatory agencies without
first undergoing an enforcement action.
(Reporting by Andrew Chung in New York; Editing by Will Dunham)
[© 2022 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |