Has the Supreme Court ever reversed a previous socially progressive decision?
People talk about “Get enough conservative justices in there, and you can undo all kinds of things”. But does that or can that really happen? Hasn’t there been a majority-conservative Supreme Court for many (if not most) of the years since the Roe v Wade decision? if so … what’s kept them from summarily overturning Rose in a fit of pique?
*** Yes, I know the SC can’t operate that way. A little hyperbole.*
Trawling through wikipedia article on the Lochner era briefly…
Depending on how you define “socially progressive”, you could argue that Lochner v. New York reversed the position in Mugler v. Kansas that the state could impose reasonable regulations on the economy in the interest of public health or safety.
There are probably more than a handful.
Apparently there’s a judge on his list that thinks consensual gay sex should be illegal…?
ETA: William Pryor! That’s the name I heard.
But like abortion, that disruption is what the people on that side WANT: a federal ban on marriage involving anyone but one man and one woman, a federal law outlawing abortion.
Anything less and they won’t be satisfied.
Trump is a great “actor”!
Yeah, this is my understanding. If I became president, the issue of whether Granny Smith apples should have their name capitalized would have no importance to me at all. If there were a group of people who really cared about it one way or another, and if I could gain some political advantage by siding with them on their stance, or by appointing judges who agreed with their capitalization stance, I’d do so, no problem.
Trump feels about SSM the way I feel about capitalizing Granny Smith apples.
Something to consider while hearing statements from Trump is that he hasn’t been elected yet. He won’t be truly free to say what he wants until Dec. 19th.
Gay rights related… Trump refuses to do something and it’s good for gay rights.
Trump may give us much to worry about on many fronts but today’s news is quoting him as refusing to act to roll back LGBTQ protections implemented as an Executive Order under the Obama administration. See USA Today story
Cue up the “broken clock right twice a day” jokes and such. At least he stumbled upon the right decision in this one little area, this one time.
Just one step closer to becoming a universally-loathed villain. He’s got somethin’ for everybody!
Or even easier: Despite the prohibitions by the supreme court, Alambama stops issuing marriage licenses. Gay couple takes them to court, Alabama despite being knocked down at every level continues to appeal until they get their supreme court case.
And the Supreme Court votes 8-1 to reaffirm Obergefell. Kennedy, Ginsberg, Breyer, Kagan, & Sotomayor holds that it was rightly decided and will not be reexamined. Roberts, Alito, and Gorsuch hold that Obergefell was wrong as an original matter but stare decisis compels that it be followed. Thomas dissents finding that Obergefell was wrong in its inception and should be overruled.
6-3. Gorsuch says “there weren’t no gays when the Constitution was written.” Alito says “Thomas told me to sign this paper, so I did.”