The court is making decisions based on the GOP platform, not the Constitution, says legal scholar Khiara M. Bridges.
When I was in law school, I was struck by the way pregnancy and motherhood were described in Supreme Court cases. On the whole, the court talked about pregnancy and motherhood in celebratory terms. They were conceptualized as good for the pregnant woman, her family, her community and the nation as a whole. Language idealizing pregnancy and motherhood could be found even in cases in which the court protected the right to terminate a pregnancy.
I was fascinated by the inversion. And race and class explain the opposition. They explain why some people’s procreation is celebrated, and other people’s procreation is denigrated. And that’s really the lesson of intersectionality. Intersectionality offers a framework for understanding the complexity of social life. It recognizes that power is exerted along many different axes in the U.S. — race, class, sex, gender identity, sexuality, ability, immigration status, religion etc.
Of course, this is not what the Republican Party is talking about when they invoke “critical race theory.” Conservative pundits and politicians say that critical race theory is being taught in K-12 schools. They say that it is “Marxist.” They say that it proposes that all white people are racist and all Black people are oppressed.
Very rarely do the villains explicitly and publicly reveal their nefarious plans. In this case, the villain did just that. Second, it really is impossible to reconcile the court’s decisions with one another. A search for a legal principle that unites the cases will turn up nothing. For example, in last year’s decision inand permitted states to criminalize abortion, the court argued that in order to determine what any given provision of the Constitution does and does not protect, we have to look to what people were thinking at the time of that provision’s ratification.
Australia Latest News, Australia Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Appeals court upholds some abortion pill restrictions in case bound for the Supreme CourtNew restrictions on access to a drug used in the most common form of abortion would be imposed under a federal appeals court ruling issued Wednesday, but the...
Read more »
Appeals court embraces abortion-pill limits, sets up Supreme Court reviewThe Supreme Court has ruled that mifepristone, a key abortion drug, will remain available for now under existing regulations while the litigation continues.
Read more »
Former Wisconsin court director files complaints over replacement after change in Supreme Court controlThe former director of Wisconsin's court system has filed complaints against his replacement and the justices who voted to remove him after liberal Supreme Court justices gained control.
Read more »
Appeals court wants limits on abortion pill access, sending case to Supreme CourtThe abortion drug mifepristone should be more tightly regulated, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals says in a ruling that now heads to the Supreme Court.
Read more »
Some abortion drug restrictions upheld by appeals court in case bound for Supreme CourtMail-order access to a drug used in the most common form of abortion in the U.S. would end under a federal appeals court ruling issued Wednesday.
Read more »
Appeals court wants limits on abortion pill access, sending case to Supreme CourtThe abortion drug mifepristone should be more tightly regulated, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals says in a ruling that now heads to the Supreme Court.
Read more »