Trump’s courtroom
contenders could seriously jeopardize women’s and civil rights.
By Marge Baker
When
voters go to the polls this November, they won’t just be choosing the next
president, they’ll also be deciding the direction of the Supreme Court.
The
fate of our rights and liberties as Americans — everything from voting rights,
to immigration, to reproductive rights — rests with those nine critical
individuals who sit on that bench.
The outcome of the 2016 election will determine who nominates justices for lifetime appointments to the highest court in the land.
The outcome of the 2016 election will determine who nominates justices for lifetime appointments to the highest court in the land.
Looking
at Trump’s track record of commitments and his list of courtroom contenders
shows just how disastrous a Trump Supreme Court would be for everyday
Americans.
Take women’s rights for example. Trump has made very clear he’s against the Roe v. Wade decision protecting women’s reproductive rights, saying it was a wrongly decided case. He also infamously called for “some form of punishment” for women who have abortions and has pledged to select anti-choice justices.
One
of Trump’s potential picks for the Supreme Court, Judge William Pryor, even
went so far as to call Roe v. Wade the “worst abomination in the history of constitutional law.”
Considering the Court’s already weakened standard, a new anti-choice justice on the Supreme
Court could significantly jeopardize past precedent.
The
executive power to nominate justices is especially important to consider this
election cycle given the possibility of multiple Supreme Court vacancies in the
next president’s first term. A Trump presidency could put women’s reproductive
rights in real danger.
On
other issues disproportionately affecting women, like sexual harassment at
work, a Trump Court would be just as perilous.
Another one of the judges Trump
mentioned as a possible nominee, Judge Steven Colloton, argued that a woman fired in retaliation for reporting sexual harassment at work shouldn’t
have been able to take legal action.
The
same trend follows in cases of civil rights, where Trump’s choices have shown
that they’re more likely to rule in favor of the powerful and privileged.
Judge
Pryor strongly opposed the ruling that said police must inform people of their Miranda rights when arrested. He
was also the judge who argued, in a case about an African American employee being
denied a promotion, that the man’s supervisor calling him “boy” was just
“conversational” and had no bearing on promotion decisions.
And multiple judges on
Trump’s list have upheld disenfranchising voter ID laws, which have an outsized
impact on minority and low-income voters.
There
are similarly foreboding examples across issues like environmental justice,
workers’ rights, and big money in politics, among others that impact our
day-to-day lives.
We
need a Supreme Court that will defend the rights of everyday Americans instead
of rolling them back. The justices our next president chooses should understand
that the Constitution is for everyone, not just the rich and powerful.
This
isn’t likely to be the case if the nominations are coming from Trump — a man
who has said all his judges would be “picked by the Federalist Society,” an organization backed by
the billionaire Koch brothers.
November
8 is “Judgment Day” for the future of the Supreme Court. Even if
it’s not printed on our ballots, that’s the day voters will decide the
direction of the nation’s highest court — for decades to come.
Marge Baker is
the executive vice president of People For the American Way. Distributed by
OtherWords.org