End of the Judicial Season

My blog has been down since the middle of last week. The blog’s IT Department (i.e., Anne Marie) diagnosed the problem as a surge protector that got burned, possibly by a lightning strike. A trip to the local office chain store and one new surge protector later, we’re back in business.

So, did I miss anything while I was gone? No? I thought so…

Just kidding! Actually, a revolution happened with several skirmishes being decided in the halls of the Supreme Court. Rulings on the Voting Rights Act (VRA) and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) capped the end of the court’s current session.

Actually, progressives had plenty of reason to fret that the court would rule the way they did. On Monday, the court ruled on affirmative action, but the actual ruling was overshadowed by reports from court observers about Chief Justice Roberts’ bench antics. They noted and gasped at such actions as Roberts rolling his eyes and shaking his head while Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg read the dissenting opinion. This could be attributed to Roberts' exercising his First Amendment rights (which I’m guessing he might know a thing or two about), but his actions constituted a serious breach of court decorum.

(I must admire that last sentence, with all of its court related terms: constituted, breach, and decorum. Sometimes I amaze even myself.)

Given this report, how could we the people hope for sane, intelligent rulings from the high court when the leading jurist in the nation behaves like a fidgety five-year-old forced to endure a long church sermon.

We also got our hopes up with reports that Justice Thomas woke up from his hibernation and actually SPOKE from the bench. Unfortunately, the reports weren’t true: he did not speak, but he did contribute to a dissenting opinion which means that at some point he was roused from his comatose state to type out a few words. Well, at least he didn’t roll his eyes.

That was Monday. On Tuesday, the Court invalidated the formula in the VRA that determined which areas of the country would be subject to federal scrutiny before they changed any of their voting rules. I can see the point of unfairness of subjecting these rules to these areas – mostly the southern states, all former members of the Confederacy — while giving the rest of the country a pass. The majority opinion argued that conditions in these areas had changed and the ergo the rules were no longer needed. (Ergo!  Wow! Where the hell did that come from?)

So yes, while conservatives rattled off statistics about African-Americans making great strides in the south, they ignored movements in the rest of the country where the VRA could be applied. Voter ID law in Pennsylvania? HELLO!

The court threw the controversy back into the laps of Congress, who being a Republican conservative majority at this time aren’t expected to do a damn thing. Yes, it was not just to apply VRA to just certain sections of the county, but why remove the incentive for Congress to correct this injustice by invalidating the law? 

Seriously, were the Justices up all night (Justice Thomas was obviously excused) thinking their decision through?

With this in mind, we had no right to expect anything but the court to uphold DOMA the next day. But, praise be, another surprise! The court ruled DOMA unconstitutional and refused to overturn a lower court’s suspension of California’s Proposition 8 banning same sex marriages.

 

The news was welcomed and cheered in the gay community and by other progressive thinking people! The reactions from conservatives and the religious right wing…yeah, well, you can’t make everyone happy. Their reactions will fill another blog entry, but for the moment we should celebrate.

Congratulations are in order for all of the soon to be newly-wed couples applying for marriage licenses in California, and congratulations to all other gay couples who have had the second class status stigma lifted from their shoulders. The rulings have been a long time in coming! Cosmos for everyone!

Yet, the combination of the two major rulings in the closing days of this court session might throw a damper on the party. Who’s to say that the given VRA is determined to be outmoded, that some douchebag legislator from the midwest won’t propose some outlandish and preposterous notion that only citizens who can furnish proof of being part of a heterosexual relationship will be allowed to vote? And there will be no VRA in place to overrule it.

Who’s to say, except me? Okay, penalize me one round of cosmos for suggesting such a thing. Either that or may God strike my new surge protector.

So one battle lost, one battle won, and the war for equal rights will continue.

(Thank you for reading. Can someone wake up Clarence Thomas and tell him he can go home now?)