Courts

Now That Abortion Rights Are Over, Segregation Is On The Table!

And overturning Sullivan too!

By  
on
brownvboard

New York World-Telegram & Sun Collection/Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. (digital file no. cph 3c27042)

I’m officially over all the Susan Collinses of the world that want to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that, in the wake of overturning Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court isn’t going to take their majority and try and to remake the country to their liking. When people tell you who they are it is in YOUR BEST INTEREST to believe them. It’s great advice in therapy and it applies here.

Anyway the latest in our national hellscape is bringing back segregation!

Oh, and overturning First Amendment stalwart New York Times v. Sullivan too!

Yes, the person that’s pushing is currently running a far, far right website, but, importantly, the Southern Poverty Law Center says VDare is a “crucial bridge between the more mainstream anti-immigrant movement, including major players in the Republican Party, and the white nationalist fringe.” Yikes.

And more to the point — this isn’t the first time either of these ideas have been floated by conservatives. Way back in 2018 during confirmation hearings, Wendy Vitter refused to say whether or not Brown v. Board of Education was correctly decided, exposing her real thoughts about racism — AND SHE WAS STILL CONFIRMED TO THE FEDERAL BENCH. What’s more, the right circled the wagons to defend her. So, Brimelow isn’t far from the mainstream — at least as much as Article 3 judges are mainstream, and you’d think if the advise and consent role of the Senate means anything, it’d mean that.

Sponsored

As for remaking First Amendment jurisprudence, well, the notoriously thin-skinned Donald Trump campaigned on the idea he would “open up” libel laws. And he isn’t a one off — no, both Justices Thomas and Gorsuch have invited the Court to revisit Sullivan. Do we *really* think Alito, Kavanaugh, and Barrett will hold the line here? Sure, some academics still have faith that the core of the actual malice standard will remain intact, but I’m not so certain.

Assuming the draft Dobbs decision largely remains the same when formally published, the majority will be riding high off of their victory. The newly embolden Court can make lots of changes to what lawyers believe is established jurisprudence.

We’ve been naïve to think otherwise.

Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).

Sponsored

Topics

, , , , , , ,