Civil & Human Rights

BREAKING: U.S. Supreme Court strikes down Section 4 of Voting Rights Act, but not Section 5

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

GavelThe U.S. Supreme Court this morning struck down the coverage formula provision of the Voting Rights Act, Section 4. Chief Justice Roberts writing for the Court held that Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional. Its formula can no longer be used as a basis for subjecting jurisdictions to preclearance.

Chief Justice Roberts writes that Section 4 is unconstitutional in light of current conditions. In 1966, the formula was rational in both practice and theory. Coverage today is based on decades-old data and eradicated practices. The Court makes clear that "Our decision in no way affects the permanent, nationwide ban on racial discrimination in voting found in [Section] 2. We issue no holding on [Section] 5 itself, only on the coverage formula [of Section 4]. Congress may draft another formula based on current conditions."

U.S. Supreme Court places new limits on discrimination claims

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

GavelThe U.S. Supreme Court this morning ruled on Fisher v. Universtiy of Texas, the affirmative action case which has been pending since last October. In a 7-1 decision (Justice Kagan is recused in this case), Justice Kennedy wrote the majority opinion for the court, with Justice Ginsberg the loan dissenter.

The Court ruled that the Fifth Circuit court's grant of summary judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded back to the Fifth Circuit, because the circuit court did not apply the strict scrutiny standard of review articulated in the Grutter and Bakke affirmative action cases in granting summary judgment. "The
reviewing court must ultimately be satisfied that no workable race-neutral alternatives would produce the educational benefits of diversity."

There was a concurring opinion by Justice Scalia, who said that because the petitioner did not ask the Court to overrule Grutter, he joins the opinion of the Court in full. This is a hint to the petitioner to ask the Supreme Court to overrule Grutter when this case returns to the Supreme Court after a decision on remand.

There was also a concurring opinion by Justice Thomas who, unlike Justice Scalia, did not want to wait for procedural due process. Justice Thomas said that he was ready to overrule Grutter now.

SCOTUS Watch: Final Week

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

GavelThe U.S. Supreme Court has saved its most controversial cases for the last week of the 2012 term. Monday is orders and opinions day, and an additional opinions (and possibly orders) day is likely to be announced on Monday. The Court has eleven merit decisions to announce this week — it is unlikely that all eleven will be announced on Monday.

Kedar Bhatia at SCOTUSblog.com has a summary of the eleven merit decisions of the 2012 term to be announced this week. Merits cases remaining for October Term 2012. Here are the cases to watch:

Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin 11-345 – Affirmative Action in college admissions.

Vance v. Ball State University 11-556 – Supervisor liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District 11-1447 – Land use takings claim.

Shelby County v. Holder 12-96 – Voting Rights Act Section 5 preclearance constitutional challenge.

How Progressives Stopped the Farm Bill

by

SNAP-springfield-massby Pamela Powers Hannley

When Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) rallied its membership and asked them to take to the streets, their computers, and their telephones to oppose food stamp cuts in the farm bill, stopping the multi-year, behemoth looked bleak.

Both versions of the bill had cuts to food stamps and school lunches; the House of Representatives version, which was defeated on Thursday, had $20 billion in cuts to food stamps + increased subsidies to agribusiness, and the Senate version has $4 billion in cuts. This is immoral– feeding the military industrial complex but not the children.

PDA mobilized nationally to stop this– hundreds of letter drops at Congressional offices around the country and in Washington DC, thousands of phone calls and e-mails to Congressional representatives. And it worked– for now. Details of the mobilization after the jump.

The price for GOP nativism and racism: $30+ billion wasted dollars

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Tea-Publicans love to rail against government spending, the federal deficit, and the national debt, and loudly proclaim that they are fiscally conservative. Bullshit.

Ronald Reagan quadrupled the national debt in eight years. George W. Bush doubled it again during his eight years, and left office with the economy cratered from the worst economic catastrophe since the Great Depression.

These "deficit peacocks" like to preen that they are against wasteful government spending, except when they are not.

The latest example: the border security "surge" proposed by Tea-Publican Senators Bob Corker and John Hoeven to secure more votes in the U.S. Senate for the "Gang of Eight" comprehensive immigration bill. They propose to waste $30 billion dollars or more to buy off nativists and racists in the anti-immigrant wing of the GOP — a dubious proposition — hatred is priceless; it defines who they are, and is their only reason for living.

MSNBC host Chris Hayes did an impressive job laying out the particulars on his program All In on Thursday evening. Transcript Thursday, June 20:

in order to stabilize and further build support from their side of the

aisle, Republican Senators Bob Corker and John Hoeven struck a deal with

the gang of eight, a deal that suddenly makes comprehensive immigration

reform seem more possible, more likely to actually happen than it has in

weeks.

That is the progress. That`s progress. It`s excellent news. And it`s

also infuriating because of how they are luring Republicans into the fold.

Corker and Hoeven have an amendment where they are calling for a border,

quote, "surge."