I’ve been nauseated by the political appointee John Robert since his appointment hearings revealed what a political activist he was. Then having watched worst fears materialize in the subsequent years and decades, has only increased my dislike.
Now, being assaulted with yet another reminder of what a monstrosity he’s been for a sane balanced American society, I figure it’s time to start a collection, cause looks like it’s going to be getting a lot worse, unless the sleepy heads out there wake up, get informed and get engaged.
How Shelby County v. Holder Broke America In the five years since the landmark decision, the Supreme Court has set the stage for a new era of white hegemony.
VANN R. NEWKIRK II, JULY 10, 2018
www. theatlantic. com/politics/archive/2018/07/how-shelby-county-broke-america/564707/
… Ignoring that deep racial disparities do still exist in every phase of voting, especially in the precincts formerly covered by the Voting Rights Act, Roberts’s legal analysis boils down to the fact that preclearance was very effective in reversing disenfranchisement, so the country no longer needs it.
In her dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg pointed out the apparent paradox of that reasoning, writing that “throwing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.”
Roberts and the Voting Rights Act: The chief justice’s stealthy plan to destroy it. John Roberts’ stealthy plan to destroy the Voting Rights Act. BY EMILY BAZELON, JUNE 25, 2013
slate. com/news-and-politics/2013/06/roberts-and-the-voting-rights-act-the-chief-justices-stealthy-plan-to-destroy-it. html
Chief Justice John Roberts’ opinion on the Voting Rights Act (#1) takes away one of the most important tools for ensuring minority rights that Congress has ever created. Yet the opinion sounds respectful and modest. This is the genius of John Roberts. He makes big steps to the right look like small ones. He is the master of conservative stealth, a chief justice who eschews flair and drama. In that sense, he’s the anti-Scalia—no flame throwing, thank you. Just getting the job done.
Eric, you’ve explained better than I can (#2) why Tuesday’s ruling, by the usual dreary 5–4 ideological split, is the opposite of judicial modesty—a term that generally means courts deferring to elected legislatures. The five conservatives struck down a law reauthorized by Congress just seven years ago because they don’t think the evidence for it was strong enough. Roberts reminds Congress: . . .
Chief Justice John Roberts’ opinion on the Voting Rights Act
(#1) www. supremecourt. gov/opinions/12pdf/12-96_6k47. pdf
(#2) slate. com/news-and-politics/2013/06/supreme-court-on-the-voting-rights-act-chief-justice-john-roberts-struck-down-part-of-the-law-for-the-lamest-of-reasons. html
A 5-4 Supreme Court threatened voting rights. A 6-3 court could finish them off. It’s a strong enough majority to nullify voters’ voices, particularly voters of color.
By Ari Berman, September 24, 2020
www. washingtonpost. com/outlook/2020/09/24/trump-roberts-supreme-court-conservative-majority/
In 2013, the Supreme Court’s five-member conservative majority gutted the Voting Rights Act by ruling that states with a long history of racial discrimination in their conduct of elections no longer needed to clear changes to voting laws with the federal government, holding that “things have changed dramatically” since the act was passed in 1965.
To this, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died Friday at 87, memorably dissented: “Throwing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet,” she wrote. Her words were prescient. Doing away with pre-clearance allowed states such as Georgia and Texas to implement new restrictions on voting, such as stricter voter ID laws, closing polling places in precincts serving minority communities and adding new barriers to voter registration that disproportionately impacted voters of color.
That’s not the only way the court, led by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. — who was appointed by President George W. Bush — has made it more difficult to vote in the past few years: . . .