U.S. Supreme Court

Amy Coney Barrett flunked the racial bias test

Submitted by scharrison on

Apparently being called a nigger by your boss is not hostile:

The 2019 case involved a Black Illinois transportation employee who sued the department after he was fired. He said his supervisor had created a hostile work environment and called him the N-word.

The unanimous three-judge panel ruled that the employee had failed to prove that he had been fired because of his race. In her opinion, Barrett wrote that the N-word is an "egregious racial epithet," but she argued that the employee couldn't win by simply proving the N-word was said to him.

If it had been a co-worker, or even a supervisor from a different department, her argument might have merit. But a direct supervisor doing that changes everything. It calls into question previous disciplinary "problems" the employee had on his work record, which is what Barrett used to justify dismissing the case. She ignored the inherent and obvious bias in his chain of command, and then held him responsible for the results of that bias. Forgetting (for the moment) the election results or dangers to Roe v. Wade, this decision proves she can't rule properly on any labor vs. management issue, a substantial portion of the Court's docket.

Ohio Gerrymandering ruling could tip the scales

Submitted by scharrison on

gerrymanderingbutton.jpg

Forcing the Supremes to do the right thing:

A federal court on Friday tossed out Ohio’s congressional map, ruling that Republican state lawmakers had carved up the state to give themselves an illegal partisan advantage and to dilute Democrats’ votes in a way that predetermined the outcome of elections.

The ruling follows decisions by four other federal courts striking down partisan gerrymanders in Wisconsin, North Carolina, Maryland and, last week, in Michigan. All but Maryland were gerrymandered by Republicans. The Supreme Court, which last year sidestepped the issue of whether partisan gerrymandering violates the Constitution, is expected to rule this spring in appeals from Maryland and North Carolina.

The 3-judge panel has directed the Ohio Legislature to have new maps ready by June, so no doubt the Supreme Court will be asked to issue a stay sometime very soon. And that unfinished business with a clock ticking will be on their minds while looking at Maryland and North Carolina. Tell me if this doesn't sound eerily familiar:

Subscribe to RSS - U.S. Supreme Court