Public Health Policy Reviews 2:
Amy Coney Barrett and Conservative Judicial Activism on the US Supreme Court
The official United States Supreme Court portrait of Amy Coney Barrett. Image courtesy of Wikipedia Commons.
Yesterday’s Public Health Policy Reviews debut featured an overview of the national policy impact of the US Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling that overturned fifty years of legal precedent with the federal repeal of Roe v. Wade [410 US 113 (1973)].
Today, we will delve into the seven (7) year series of political and legal events that led up to the current abysmal state of reproductive rights and healthcare outcomes for women and girls in America. Starting in June 2015, when Donald Trump first officially announced his Presidential candidacy, most establishment politicians, mainstream media members, and seasoned political consultants disparaged his intelligence and political acumen.
It is not a stretch to say that people in establishment politics and the mainstream media vastly underestimated Mr. Trump. The political moves and legal strategies he consistently used to outmaneuver establishment Republicans and liberals in the Democratic Party over the past seven years now offer ample proof of his political aptitude.
**********
On November 8th, 2016, a sizable portion of the American electorate chose Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton for President of the United States.
The “MAGA” (Make America Great Again) voters were concerned about jobs, the economy, the safety of our communities, and the country’s security. Donald Trump changed his views on abortion from pro-choice to pro-life. He pledged to appoint justices to the Supreme Court committed to overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1970 ruling that made abortion legal.
As President, Mr. Trump began to support “traditional marriage.” Trump also ended many legal protections for the LGBT community during his first year in office.
Former President Donald Trump’s most successful political strategies often involved appointing conservative White women as prominent political, bureaucratic, and judicial representatives. For example, on September 26th, 2020, President Trump named Judge Amy Coney Barrett as his nominee to fill the Supreme Court vacancy left by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (1933-2020).
**********
Former US President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump pose for a photo with Judge Amy Coney Barrett, the President’s nominee for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, and her family in the Oval Office of the White House on September 26th, 2020. The image is courtesy of the official White House Photo service via Andrea Hanks.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination caused additional controversy because it happened just weeks before the 2020 US presidential election.
Barrett’s subsequent confirmation on October 26th, 2020, was a significant victory for ideological conservatives and the anti-abortion movement. The US Congress confirmed Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court without much of a fight from the Democratic Party establishment, American feminists, and liberal opponents of the national Republican Party (GOP).
Unfortunately, the national Congressional leadership and bureaucratic apparatus of the Democratic party do not recognize their supporters are not as loyal to them as Donald Trump’s supporters are to him.
However, nothing highlights the political emergency created by Donald Trump’s political impact upon America more than the repeal of Roe v. Wade in 2022. Roe v. Wade was the landmark 1973 US Supreme Court decision that ruled the Constitution of the United States must protect the civil liberties of pregnant women to have an abortion without excessive government restrictions.
**********
The Political Reality
Justice Barrett’s confirmation and subsequent appointment to the US Supreme Court is proof that Donald Trump’s strategy to use White women as a political wedge constituency is remarkably successful.
During his Presidency, Donald Trump often questioned the constitutional authority of the judiciary branch. He also attacked courts and judges he disagreed with at every level via the national media.
However, Mr. Trump also appointed more than two hundred politically conservative judges to the federal judiciary. Senate Republicans rapidly confirmed Trump’s judicial nominations to the federal courts after successfully blocking former President Barack Obama’s federal judicial appointees during his eight (8) year term in the White House.
The confirmations of Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch – now allow right-wing conservatives and evangelical Christians to implement and reinforce their revanchist legal philosophies regarding federal civil rights and civil liberties in the United States. All three judges believe that individual civil liberties are subordinate to Christian religious doctrine, property rights, and business law.
**********
Sarah Weddington, one of the two attorneys who represented the pseudonymous Norma McCorvey in the 1970 Texas lawsuit that is the foundation of the Roe v. Wade decision. Image courtesy of Wikipedia Commons.
Suppose you are enough of a legal “nerd” to read the judicial opinions and academic writings of Justices Amy Barrett, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch.
In that case, you might conclude that the federal courts will roll back social gains achieved by women and ethnic minorities over the last fifty (50) years. Even the amendments to the US Constitution that deal with equal protection, civil rights, race, gender, and privacy—the Bill of Rights—must be re-litigated in the opinion of the three conservative justices.
In addition, the personal religious convictions and ultra-conservative institutional associations of Justices Barrett, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch mean that right-wing Catholics and evangelical Christian judges will be the ultimate arbiters of civil rights and civil liberties jurisprudence in America for a pretty long time.
To put it simply, the legal considerations of religious fundamentalists, private corporations, and far-right-wing “law and order” populist politicians like Donald Trump will dominate federal legal rulings for at least the next twenty (20) years.
**********
Linda Coffee is the second of two attorneys who represented the pseudonymous Norma McCorvey in the 1970 Texas lawsuit that is the foundation of the Roe v. Wade decision. Image courtesy of Wikipedia Commons.
Public health, civil rights, and economic, and political policy issues are complex, and opinions on how the American electorate should resolve them differ.
Individuals may have varying perspectives on President Trump’s handling of these issues based on their beliefs, experiences, and priorities. Yet, the overturning of “Roe” was possible because of Mr. Trump’s ability to appoint three judges to the Supreme Court during his tenure.
There is no dispute—even among conservative political historians—that the legacy of Trump’s political policies has devastated a half-century of notable social, economic, and civil rights gains for women and minorities. Replacing the late Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg—a liberal stalwart on the Supreme Court for twenty-eight (28) years—with Judge Amy Coney Barrett highlights the Trump-led repeal of Roe v. Wade.
Donald Trump chose Justice Barrett to punish left-wing and liberal women for being the loudest and most enthusiastic voting constituency opposing his policy agendas.
**********
Women have unequal access to money, social power, and property compared to men in every culture and country worldwide.
American society emulates this unequal social, economic, and cultural model even though we are in an era where US women have made vast progress in the areas of civil rights, economic advancement, and healthcare research.
While liberals and left-wing progressives are preoccupied with hair-brained ideas for expanding the Supreme Court, Donald Trump and right-wing conservatives are busy taking over state legislatures and federal judiciaries across America.