Article Author:
Washington — Supreme Court of the United States A conservative majority of courts have shown that recent blockbuster abortion and other high-profile decisions are fearless of overturning or even ignoring historic cases.
And even if the current term ends on Thursday, a conservative judge with a majority of six to three may just be in the beginning.
In some of the cases the court has already taken up for the next term starting in October, the university's policy of considering admission competition to increase student diversity ends in a conservative block. There are two cases that give you the opportunity to do it. We will approach the court, which was upheld by the 2003 case and reconfirmed in 2016. Another next case, including the federal protection of waterways, sets the stage for further testing.
A recent flood of courts has overturned or weakened the case decades ago.
"I think the most conservative judges hate much of modern American law and are actively changing it. They aren't going to set a precedent," said the University of Virginia School of Law. Professor Douglas Laycock of the school said.
Conservative judges have become more and more aggressive since the addition of former President Donald Trump's third conservative appointed Amy Coney Barrett in 2020. Thursday's Breyer does not change the balance of court ideology.
In an abortion decision called the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the court ruled a groundbreaking 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized national procedures and 1992. Overturned the judgment. I reconfirmed it. A conservative majority was also left to a decision of oblivion in 2016 and 2020, which broke Republican-backed state abortion restrictions.
Conservative judge Clarence Thomas was open about his willingness to abandon the Supreme Court's case.
"My rules are simple when faced with an apparently false case. We shouldn't follow it," Thomas wrote in favor of the 2019 case.
Thomas's opinion focused on "staring decisions". This is a Latin word that refers to the legal principle that courts must not overturn case law without special reason. Samuel Alito of Conservative Justice sentenced to abortion on June 24https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf,で、Roeのランドマークは「ひどく間違っている」と書いているのと同じ見解を持っているようでした。
Thomas in abortion case legalized same-sex marriage in 2015 He sounded a considerable alarm on the left, writing his consensus that the court should consider overturning other judicial precedents that protect personal freedom, including. A 2003 decision ending the state's ban on same-sex intimacy and a 1965 decision to protect access to contraception.
Religious Rights
In a judgment on religious rights on June 27, the court set a precedent when it decided to further narrow the separation of church and state and support public high schools. I took a slightly different approach to it. A school football coach suspended by a local school district after a match to lead a prayer on the field with the players.
The court outlined in 1971 how to determine if the government violated the so-called "establishment clause" of the First Amendment to the United States, which prohibits the government from approving religions. The case was effectively dismissed. Explicitly say so.
Instead, conservative judge Neil Gorsuch said the court "was abandoned" previous and subsequent decisions based on it. wrote. Judge Sonia Sotomayor of the Liberal Party disagreed in a previous proceeding of the court, saying that "nothing supports the court's decision to completely dismiss the case."
David Gunns, a lawyer at the Liberal Center for Constitutional Liability, said the court did not seem to want to admit the "sea change" of the law.
"It's very flashy," Guns added.
Conservatives have long complained about the affirmative action policies used by many universities to increase the number of black and Hispanic students. Harvard University and the University of North Carolina are involved in the case heard by the court.
The court also limits the scope of groundbreaking federal environmental law that regulates waterways if the challenger asks the court to reconsider the 2006 case. Consider that.
Among other major cases of the coming year, state courts could give state legislatures much stronger power over federal elections by limiting their ability to consider actions. We will hear an appeal by a sexual Republican in North Carolina.
Another case is a groundbreaking 1965 voting right enacted to protect blacks and other minority voters in a controversy over the US House of Commons drawn by the Republican Party of Alabama. It may further weaken the law. According to a federal database listing such cases in
234, courts have occasionally overturned that precedent from time to time throughout its history.
In recent years, courts have most wanted to overturn four cases in 2019.
The court has over time discovered "many ways to avoid, distinguish, or dismiss precedent," Lacock said, saying that the liberal majority is likely to do the same. Added.
(Report by Lawrence Hurley; edited by Will Dunham and Scott Malone)
