Ruth Bader Ginsburg: 5 Male Justices Have A 'Blind Spot' On Women's Issues
Source: Huffington Post
Posted: 07/31/2014
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said Thursday in an interview on Yahoo News that five men on the court have a "blind spot" when it comes to discrimination against women.
The five conservative justices last month ruled in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., that closely held for-profit corporations can refuse for religious reasons to cover contraception in their health insurance plans. Ginsburg, the two other women on the court and Justice Stephen Breyer dissented with the majority opinion, arguing that allowing some employers to choose what kinds of health coverage their women employees receive is a form of discrimination.
Asked by Katie Couric whether the five male justices fully understood the ramifications of their decision, Ginsburg replied, "I would have to say no."
"It's a little bit like the Pregnancy Discrimination Act -- not getting a simple point," Ginsburg said, referring to a 2009 decision in which the majority ruled that women cannot receive retirement credit for maternity leave taken before the law was passed in 1978. "But justices continue to think and can change."
Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/31/ginsburg-hobby-lobby_n_5636254.html
She's still a helluva lot more optimistic than I am, that's for sure.
hedgehog
(36,286 posts)theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)She believes the 5 Neanderpiggies didn't really comprehend the ramifications of their decision. I think they did but just didn't give a damn. Of course, if you take another perspective on what Justice Ginsburg said, then she was politely inferring that they were too stupid to understand their own ruling. Now that I could buy.
valerief
(53,235 posts)theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)It looks as if we're stuck not with three blind mice but five blind rats.
Raster
(20,998 posts)Sunlei
(22,651 posts)http://www.makers.com/ruth-bader-ginsburg?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000046
DRoseDARs
(6,810 posts)...and are constantly surprised (dismayed?) when they don't find the women there.
Gothmog
(145,627 posts)The fact that Scalia has a blind spot should surprise no one
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)the sooner the better.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)I've never thought of him as a moderate.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Kennedy is more accurately thought of as a swing vote than a moderate. He's a conservative but is somewhat less doctrinaire than his four colleagues. He will (in, admittedly, a minority of cases) disagree with them, and provide the crucial fifth vote that the four liberals need.
An obvious example is United States v. Windsor. By a 5-4 vote, Kennedy and the four liberals held that it was unconstitutional for the federal government to withhold benefits (Social Security, etc.) from same-sex couples who were legally married under state law.
That decision did not, by itself, establish marriage equality nationwide. It was, however, immediately beneficial to quite a few married same-sex couples around the country. Furthermore, the logic of the opinion (written by Kennedy) was not the narrow ground of federalism, holding that laws concerning marriage were traditionally the province of the states and that the federal government had to defer to each state's law. Instead, Kennedy based the decision on the Equal Protection Clause. That's why Scalia, in dissent, argued (correctly, as it turned out) that Kennedy's opinion "arms well every challenger to a state law restricting marriage to its traditional definition."
If Kennedy had stayed with the conservatives in Windsor, I doubt that we would have seen the wave of lower-court decisions that have brought marriage equality to many additional states.
dem in texas
(2,674 posts)they think women want birth control so they can go out and screw like crazy and not worry about getting pregnant. they have no idea of the toll pregnancy takes on a woman's body and health, not to mention how hard it is to raise a child. So sad that we have five supreme court justices that are so ignorant about women's health needs.
theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)Probably both.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Hateful religious or libertarian types--either way, (I've seen both), they're self-righteous and hateful conservafascists.