"With such critical issues as voting rights, reproductive choice, executive power, the death penalty and campaign finance reform likely to come before the justices in coming years, many of the court’s landmark precedents — both recent and longstanding — may hang in the balance," says Elizabeth Wydra, president of the liberal Constitutional Accountability Center.
You are here
"When you think about the rights in the balance, whether it's racial equality, gender equality, reproductive access, religious liberty, all of these issues that go to the Supreme court, Americans care deeply about," said Elizabeth Wydra, president of the progressive Constitutional Accountability Center. "So I think they care deeply about who will be appointing the next justices."
Looking back at 2005, it’s pretty clear that Senate Republicans can promptly fill a vacancy on the Court (and deal with an announced retirement) when they want to. Their partisan inaction now is nothing short of shameful. And the Court, the country, and Merrick Garland are paying the price.
Elizabeth Wydra of the progressive Constitutional Accountability Center says that the appeals court is "exhibit A" of why judicial nominations are crucial to a president's legacy. "President Obama was able to put several brilliant legal minds on the bench, who are much more likely to follow the law where it leads rather than accept the extreme conservative deregulatory agenda pushed by this case," she said.
Rather than looking at individual power plants, the rule "viewed the grid as a big, integrated machine," Carlson said on a call hosted by the Constitutional Accountability Center and promoted by the Environmental Defense Fund. "EPA took advantage of the interconnected nature of the grid."
As we celebrate Constitution Week this year, let’s remind ourselves and our public officials of the staggering achievement of that extraordinary founding document signed 229 years ago, and the later generations of Americans who worked to make it even more faithful to our founding values. Remembering our Constitution’s progress and promise, and the system of justice we need to make it a reality, has never been more important.
“That’s exactly what we’ve seen happen. Think about the immigration case for Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA), where millions of families are living in uncertainty because of the Supreme Court; not because it ruled the other, but because it couldn’t rule at all. This has left a crucial legal issue unresolved, and it’s not only an important issue for the law,” said Elizabeth Wydra, president of the Constitutional Accountability Center. “It’s an important issue for actual people whose lives you know are deeply and profoundly impacted by the courts inability to do its job.”
The federal courts may not always be the focus of the American populace, but those courts’ decisions affect Americans every day. This election year, more so than most, that empty seat on the Supreme Court makes clear just how high the stakes are.
Any president, at any time in history, is crucial to this constitutional narrative because of his or her ability to work with the legislative branch to pass laws that enforce our constitutional guarantees and take care that those laws are faithfully executed. But this particular presidential election may be especially important because of the impact the next president is likely to have on the Supreme Court.
Clinton has said only that the Senate should consider Obama’s nomination of Garland. Elizabeth Wydra, president of the progressive Constitutional Accountability Center, said that stance helps explain why Clinton won’t discuss what she would do as president. “She is being respectful to the constitutional process by expecting the Senate Republicans to do their job and confirm or at least consider President Obama’s nominee,” Wydra said.
David Gans, the Director of the Human Rights, Civil Rights & Citizenship Program at the Constitutional Accountability Center, said in an interview with Bloomberg BNA that the plaintiffs are challenging a “very generous” religious accommodation. “This is a very basic way of accommodating religious objections – you see it all the time in other employment contexts,” Gans said.