Justice Jackson is educating Alabama about the 14th Amendment

[Nevilledog]

Link to tweet

Alabama Wants to Pervert the 14th Amendment to Gut Voting Rights. So Justice Jackson Took Them Back to History Class.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/10/alabama-wants-to-pervert-the-14th-amendment-to-gut-voting-rights-so-justice-jackson-took-them-back-to-history-class/


The Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority often rely on “originalism,” professing to apply the Constitution as they believe the founders intended—and did so last term to issue rulings eroding Americans’ rights to abortion and gun control. On Tuesday, during her second day of arguments as a Supreme Court justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson applied this same originalist approach in an area where her conservative colleagues avoid it. In a case out of Alabama that threatens to gut critical protections for voters of color, she delivered a history lesson on the original purpose of the 14th Amendment—laying out the background behind the clause to explain why it actually supports robust enforcement of voting rights.

In oral arguments in a case called Merrill v. Milligan, Alabama argued that the 14th Amendment, passed in 1868 to ensure citizenship and equality under the law for people freed from slavery, is in conflict with the Voting Rights Act, which requires drawing political maps with race in mind, in order to give minority groups often clustered in particular regions an equal shot at political participation.

Alabama’s contention is that the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment is in tension with this element of the Voting Rights Act: The 14th Amendment mandates race blindness while the VRA requires taking race into account. As Justice Amy Coney Barrett said in summarizing Alabama’s arguments, the 14th Amendment is a rock, the VRA is a hard place, and Alabama is caught in between. This contention is a key one that Alabama is relying on to bring a case that could force the country to essentially abandon the VRA, one of its best tools to fight discrimination and facilitate political equality.

Enter Justice Jackson. She countered Alabama’s arguments by explaining why the 14th Amendment and the VRA are not in conflict—thanks to originalism. “I don’t think that the historical record establishes that the Founders believed that race neutrality or race blindness was required,” she said. The 1866 Civil Rights Act said that Black citizens would have the same rights as white citizens. The 14th Amendment helped to make that a more permanent reality—but enshrining equality among races is not the same thing as mandating blindness to race. The amendment “was drafted to give a constitutional foundation for a piece of legislation that was designed to make people who had less rights and less opportunity equal to white citizens.” The Voting Rights Act, she continued, is doing exactly that.

*snip*

[elleng]

1. Justice Jackson is educating EVERYONE,

and as I suspected, she will do so FOREVER!

[JohnSJ]

2. Yes, at least as far as the general public, but not those in Alabama trying to misrepresent why the

14 amendment came into being, and completely taking it out of the context, to justify their blatant discrimination

I only hope that Roberts, perhaps Kavanaugh, maybe Gorsuch might be persuadable.

I have no hope for Alito or Thomas. Don't have any idea what Barrett would do.

[elleng]

15. I suspect there are some persuadables, including those you named, and she'll do the work for them

and OTHERS.

[JohnSJ]

19. I hope so

[happy feet]

11. Unfortunately, I suspect the Repub

Justices will twist the interpretation to fit their desired ruling outcome -- for Alabama. They don't need no facts---

[Baitball Blogger]

36. Did you hear what KJB just did with that opinion?

She addressed the voo-doo strict constructionist. The founding fathers WERE concerned about racial discrimination. THAT's why they passed the 14th Amendment. End game.

[happy feet]

39. I did

Just have no faith the conservative justices care one whit about the education she gave them about the constitution...only their desired outcome.

[progressoid]

3. Nice!

[multigraincracker]

4. I think she will be the most consequential pick for the court

in a very long time. Keep up the good work Joe.

[elleng]

12. I agree.

[madamesilverspurs]

5. Lord Alito

will not like this.


Good.


.

[Peregrine Took]

10. Like the "Lord" title - he certainly seems to think he's above the common herd by quite a bit. n/t

[SergeStorms]

26. He slimed right in....

when Scalia exited the SC Opus Dei gang to his heavenly reward.

Now he's running the con-side of the SC like organized crime. 🙄

[rurallib]

13. !

[Historic NY]

6. Can't wait to hear her lesson on Sections 3 of the 14th Amendment.

[WarGamer]

7. very impressive... great selection.

[liberalla]

8. Stellar!

[Peregrine Took]

9. I'm going to get a t shirt about her - I wonder if there's one out yet?

She is fantastic and only her second day.

[ancianita]

18. They are all over the place.

https://www.redbubble.com/shop/?iaCode=u-clothing&query=ketanji%20brown%20jackson

[rurallib]

14. She really hit the ground running, didn't she!

She sure ain't gonna go down without a fight!

What an excellent summation of the history.

[gratuitous]

16. And now you see the danger of seating a Black woman on the Supreme Court

Taking things like the actual context of the times and the legislative history means that people like Justice Barrett can't just make up any old argument they want to reverse-engineer the outcome they desire.

In the face of Justice Jackson's history lesson, we'll see how consistent the conservative fealty to "originalism" or "textualism" is. Hahaha! They don't believe in that at all! They're just going to issue the opinion they want to issue, ignore or distort anything that doesn't support that opinion, and there's fuck all anyone can do about it.

[intheflow]

21. The Qourt will ignore this.

She talks about the framers and originalism, but to them, the framers are only Jefferson, Franklin, and the like. The 14th Amendment was written by carpetbaggers who stole the election so Lincoln became president in order to free the slaves (his version of owning the conservatives). Therefore, because those amendments were not in the original constitution, they'll feel free to overturn it.

[msfiddlestix]

17. Absolutely Brilliantly stated. I wonder how the opposition responded to that question?

I had to miss this segment during the live feed.. thank you for posting Jackson's brilliant statement/question.

Now, I'd love to know how the opposition, the Racist Alabama State defenders, defended their position?

What exactly did they say in response?

Most importantly, I'd love to know how far Alito, Kavanagh et al had to bend over to provide cover and support for Alabama et al.

[Delmette2.0]

20. I think RBG is smiling.

Justice Jackson is the right person for the Supreme Court.

[Beachnutt]

22. Speaking of 14th amendment

[SleeplessinSoCal]

23. I feel ignorant right now. And often as well

I still don't understand what their arguments actually say.

[TigressDem]

29. That you don't understand the REICH Wing BS is understandable.

Here is what I heard.


The haters:
Founders said to be color BLIND but VRA says make sure to give fair chance to people of color in setting up voting districts. WAHHHH. How can we do both?



FACTS:
The Civil Rights Act of 1866 declared all persons born in the United States to be citizens, "without distinction of race or color, or previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude."

14th Amendment of 1868 granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States—including former enslaved people—and guaranteed all citizens “equal protection of the laws.”

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is a landmark piece of federal legislation in the United States that prohibits racial discrimination in voting.

What Justice Jackson basically said:

"THESE ARE NOT IN CONFLICT. They are all about giving people who had less rights the rights already given to white citizens. "

Think of it this way:
The first two outline those rights, the VRA describes violations of those rights and proscribes solutions.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

31. Thank you for spelling that out for me.

It appears that this has always been clear, decade after decade. Until this batch of goons knew they could, through majority of ideologues, pull the wool over our eyes and call it enlightenment.

[TigressDem]

33. You are welcome, but I am learning as I go too.

These connections that Justice Jackson made brought clarity to the situation that I hadn't thought deeply about before. Because to me, VRA "had to be" a continuation of making the situation better. Why else would it have been brought forth and debated and enacted? I trusted that this was a good thing, knew some things about it and went on with my life.

Until the haters, the stupid, racist bastards tried to make this crazy point, I would have thought no one would be so stupid to challenge it, least of all anyone with a law degree.

Honestly, when the government isn't so corrupted and we aren't on the verge of civil war, it's easy to take for granted that as long as it works, it's working.

But when We The People become the army of the many between those who would oppress and destroy our Democracy we have to wade in and educate ourselves to the intricacies so we can make the right decisions at the voting booth.

It's exhausting.

I did have a Dad who loved history and told me to always keep an eye on the rich for the sake of Democracy. He taught me what he knew, but his education was limited. He did what he could to see that mine wasn't.

I grew up in California where the schools WERE more progressive and even then I didn't learn as much history as I've had to dig into since W *ush and the crap that went on in Florida that took away Gore's chance to get in and deal with Climate change.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

34. Thanks again.

There are so many factors that brought us to this point. 9/11 seemed to have been a catalyst for the conspiracy industry. Right wing radio voices made Democrats villains. I recall pleas to bring back the Fairness Doctrine after 9/11. (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Fairness-Doctrine).

Instead, public air waves were dominated and abused for the purpose of transmitting misinformation. All apparently out of fear of the masses by the 1%.

Looking honestly at the Alex Jones' Sandy Hook conspiracy fallout, why is he still allowed on the air? Answer: 1st Amendment. And it's been butchered just like the 2nd Amendment.

Hard to believe there ever was an "American Dream". It's a bloody nightmare.

[Lonestarblue]

24. Most of the right-wing cabal on the Supreme Court waltzed to their positions.

As a black woman, I suspect Justice Jackson had to work harder and prove herself smarter and better than her white peers. She is better prepared than any of them.

[Hekate]

27. I suspect you are right. From Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who was required by the dean to justify...

…”taking the place of a man in this law school” in front of her fellow students, to Elena Kagen and Sonia Sotomayor, women are the Other in the long climb to power. In Ketanji Brown Jackson we have a two-fer. She is exactly who we want to have on the Court in these times.

[Hekate]

25. KnR

[TigressDem]

28. BOOM SHAKA LAKA!!! Slam dunk!!

[Lucinda]

30. ❤️ ✿❧🌿❧✿ ❤️

[Hermit-The-Prog]

32. Mother Jones quotes Thurgood Marshall...

Justice Jackson’s progressive originalism mirrors the objections of Justice Thurgood Marshall more than four decades ago to the idea that the 14th Amendment, enacted to lift up Black people, was in fact a constitutional impediment to doing so. “Such a result,” Marshall wrote in the affirmative action case known as Bakke, “would pervert the intent of the Framers by substituting abstract equality for the genuine equality the Amendment was intended to achieve.”

[Baitball Blogger]

35. How did we make it this far without someone like Ketanji Brown Jackson saying the woke part

out loud.

You simple minded racists, race can be discussed in the 14th Amendment, because it IS about a remedy to racial discrimination.

[Jack the Greater]

37. At around 1:30 minutes she begins to establish that "the founders"

"drafted the Civil Rights Act of 1866". I don't believe this is generally accepted to be the case. The "founders" were all dead by 1866.

[Mopar151]

38. Day 2? Here come da Judge!