Civil and Human Rights

RELEASE: Reaction to Court’s Ruling in Allen v. Cooper

WASHINGTON – On news this morning of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Allen v. Cooper, Constitutional Accountability Center Appellate Counsel Dayna Zolle and Civil Rights Director David Gans issued the following reaction: 

“We are disappointed in today’s ruling,” Zolle said. “Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, by design, grants Congress broad authority to enact ‘appropriate legislation’ to enforce that Amendment’s guarantees, and Section 5’s text and history confirm the substantial breadth of Congress’s enforcement authority. The Copyright Remedy Clarification Act is, in fact, a ‘congruent and proportional’ response to a history of unconstitutional conduct by states that Congress sought to remedy and deter.”  

“As Justice Stephen Breyer’s separate opinion noted,” Gans continued, “the Court’s cases have gotten the Constitution wrong and incorrectly denied Congress the authority to protect individuals from state infringement of constitutional rights. While Justice Breyer and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg concurred in the ruling, they noted their continuing dissent from the Court’s repeated closing of the courthouse doors on individuals injured by state governmental action.”  

# 

Resources:

CAC case page in Allen v. Cooper: https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/allen-v-cooper/

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. Visit CAC’s website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Civil and Human Rights

Civil and Human Rights
May 27, 2020

#PurpleChairChat Episode 4: Free Speech and Equality in the Digital Age

By: David H. Gans, Praveen Fernandes
Civil and Human Rights
May 21, 2020

RELEASE: NEW ISSUE BRIEF: Speech and Its Relationship to Equality: Constitutional Values in the Digital Age

“When confronting lies, hate, and harmful propaganda online—which we can expect to reach a fever...
By: David H. Gans
Civil and Human Rights
May 21, 2020

ISSUE BRIEF: Speech and Its Relationship to Equality: Constitutional Values in the Digital Age

Understanding the constitutional duty to strike a balance between speech and equality can help inform...
By: David H. Gans
Civil and Human Rights
April 8, 2020

The Contraceptive Mandate Returns to the Court for a Third Time

Since President Trump entered office, his Administration has relentlessly sought to undermine the Patient Protection...
By: Rebecca Damante
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania; Donald J. Trump v. Pennsylvania

In Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania and Trump v. Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court is considering whether agency rules, which provide an unconditional religious exemption from the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive coverage requirement to not-for-profit,...
Civil and Human Rights
February 29, 2020

Justices to hear first major abortion case of Trump era

The Hill
Measures like Louisiana’s are simply “arbitrary ways to make it harder for patients to obtain...
By: David H. Gans, By John Kruzel