Neil Gorsuch Pros And Cons

Nearly 100 years after the 15th amendment was ratified, vast disparities and blatant discrimination in voting process and practice were still pervasive, particularly in certain southern states like Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana. The 1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA) was enacted by congress to address this enduring inequity. Section 5 of the VRA requires that states meeting criteria set out in section 4(b) of the act, must obtain federal “preclearance” before enacting any laws that affect voting. Section 4(b) provides the conditions for the preclearance requirement as state or jurisdictions where less than 50% of minorities were registered to vote in 1964.

Judge Neil Gorsuch is President Donald Trump's choice to fill the Supreme Court seat vacated a year ago by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. Gorsuch graduated from Columbia, Harvard and Oxford, clerked for two Supreme Court justices and did a stint at the Department of Justice. He attended Harvard Law with former President of the United States Barack Obama. Since 2006, he has served on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, in Colorado.

Holder, Justice Roberts argued that the constraints, such as preclearance, in Sections 4 and 5 of the Voting Rights Act where applicable in the 1960s and 1970s but as the environment has changed, the sections now violate States rights and power to regulate elections that was granted to them by the Tenth Amendment. The Court also held that the formula established is outdated and does not fall in line with the changes that have occurred in the past 50 years. Justice Thomas, who wrote the concurring opinion, argued that since blatant discrimination is now rare, “Congress cannot constitutionally justify placing the burden of Section 5 on the states in question” (SHELBY COUNTY v.

The United States president, Barack Obama, nominated a longtime federal judge Merrick Garland to take the position of the Supreme Court and replace the former justice, Antonin Scalia. Merrick Garland’s past decisions related to different issues had made him the talk of the town. Although Garland has a 19 year record on the U.S. court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, this does not lend him to a fast evaluation (Mcshane).

Judge Neil Gorsuch is President Donald Trump's selection to fill the Supreme Court seat that was left open a year ago by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. Gorsuch graduated from Columbia, Harvard and Oxford, was a clerk for two Supreme Court justices and worked for a period of time at the Department of Justice. He attended Harvard Law with former President of the United States Barack Obama. Gorsuch has served on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, in Colorado since 2006.

Neil Gorsuch was sworn in as a Supreme Court Justice on April 10, 2017. Since then, he has ruled on a variety of cases such as the California gun law, LGBT rights, Trump’s travel ban, and use of taxpayer money for Religious schools. His rulings have fallen on the conservative side. A good Justice has integrity, is educated, has experience, and is virtuous. Neil Gorsuch may display those qualities of a suitable Justice, but his rulings are biased from his beliefs. A Justice should plainly interpret the law, not add their own point of view. The Justice President Trump appointed, Neil Gorsuch, does have the education and experience of an exceptional judge, but his conservative values hinder his ability to express fair rulings in cases.

Holder it was determined that times have changed since the 1960’s, yet the new state voting ID laws show how minorities continue to be oppressed by the dominant race. According to states like Alabama, Texas and Mississippi they are enacting these voting ID laws to prevent voter fraud during elections, yet evidence has shown that voting fraud is almost non-existent(The Voting Rights Act: Hard-Won Gains, An Uncertain Future). Also, the states do not take into consideration inequalities that these laws will reveal. These actions made by the states show their unequal treatment towards the minority class because they will be the most affected by these laws. There are a variety of reasons why people would not be able to obtain an ID, the most common one will be financial hardships. It is evident that there is a wage gap in the U.S economy and that minorities earn less than the average white American. It was an unjust decision of the Supreme Court to take away the law that gave them equality and did not require them to make extra prerequisites in order to be able to vote. These regulatory measures are another way to keep these minorities oppressed and ultimately keep the social hierarchy as it is, dominant race at the top and the minorities at the bottom, having to work their way up the social ladder. The supreme court decision was unwarranted due to the knowledge of discrimination still happening in the

The Supreme Court is the final judge of cases and interprets the constitution but it remains limited in power due to checks by the other two branches of government. The Supreme Court has eight Associate Justices and one Chief Justice. Associate Justices, as well as the Chief Justice, hear cases, fewer than 100, and rule decisions on them. The Chief Justice is the presiding judge in the Supreme Court. Antonin Scalia was a conservative meaning he had traditional values and disliked change. President- elect, Donald Trump, is a republican and is likely to replace Antonin Scalia with someone who has likeminded political views to avoid gridlock when he becomes president. Someone who is a president-elect means that they have been elected as president but have not taken office yet. Gridlock occurs in government when people are unable to function due to conflicting views and opinions on political issues. It is important to consider many factors when nominating an individual to serve on the Supreme Court, including their age, justices serve for life. Donald Trump has released a list containing potential individuals to replace Scalia’s empty Associate Justice seat, however, Ted Cruz is not on that list. Trump’s list is made up of many federal judges and state supreme court justices. When Donald Trump becomes president and is able to nominate an individual, the nomination must be confirmed by the Senate,

When Associate Justice Antonin Scalia perished in Texas from natural causes, the focus was on the storm of controversy that was sparked by the now vacant space on the highest court in the nation, rather than the great tragedy of an honorable and long-serving government official passing away. While this does paint a sorry picture of our nation's focus on who has the power rather than individual's happiness, the altercation caused by the urgent, important, and pressing question of who should appoint the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court and who the next Associate Justice should by is in many ways essential to what our country's main policies become in the next fifty years. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), the senate majority leader and thus

Circuit has been simulated in federal courts around the nation. Presently, Obama has had two hundred and eighty judges established, which signifies a third of the federal judiciary. When President Obama took office, Republicans controlled ten of the thirteen circuit court appeals. However, Democratic appointees now govern a majority in the circuit. Since federal judges have life term, most of President Obama’s judges will remain serving after he leaves office. Likewise, according to the Obama brief article, “President Obama took office after years of intense conservative focus on the courts limiting issues like abortion rights, ending racial preferences, and lowering barriers between church and state.” However, President Obama has minimized a political battle with conservatives on these issues. .”(The Obama brief, www.newyorker.com) Furthermore, another important group of judges to acknowledge is openly gay judges. According to the Obama brief article, President Obama stated in an interview with Jeffery Toobin that “when I first took office there was only one openly gay judge. His administration succeeded in adding ten additional openly gay judges.” This is one of the major accomplishments of President

How do I feel about the Supreme Court being more conservative now that Gorsuch is sworn in? Well, I am tremendously pleased! In our Supreme Court, we now have five conservatives and four liberals, majority being the conservatives. With more conservatives we should have less taxes, less government control, and essentially, a return to our original constitution. Liberals think that Americans are not clever enough to know what's good for them, they believe that they should control everything, but now that there are more conservatives, we, the people, have more power.

In 2013 a court case “Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder” that challenged the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act, the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision ruled that Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which was an act that …..was unconstitutional because it was based off of old data and no longer applied to those certain nine states which were Alabama, Texas, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, Louisiana and Virginia. (Excerpt from Shelby County, Ala. V. Holder) The Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder was unjust because it abolished Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act which protected minorities from voting discrimination in the South and caused a step back on the path to full equality because those nine states will go back to their ways where they discriminated and hindered African American and minorities from voting because they no longer have the authority of the Voting Rights Act over their heads.

In 2013, the Supreme Court decided to gut the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in Shelby County v. Holder by deciding Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional. The Voting Rights Act was meant to prevent historically discriminatory states from passing discriminatory voting laws. The purpose was to end racial discrimination in voting. Section 4(b) lays out the formula for which these states are selected. Basically, if the state had a history of restricting votes through tests or other means, their voting laws would be subject to review. The constitutionality of this section, as well as Section 5, was brought into question in Shelby County v. Holder.

Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr., was sworn into the Supreme Court on September 29, 2005 and was nominated by President George W. Bush. John Roberts, Jr., took the place of Chief Justice William Renquist after he passed away and the seat became open. His political affiliation is Republican and he has worked for

It has been 52 years since the 1965 Voting Rights Act was put into action, less than a lifetime, and yet it has been easy for the American population to look away from policy changes and ramifications within the Act. Many people today, believe that everyone has the ability to vote if they are a citizen 18 or over, but this has not been the case ever, even in today’s “modern” society. Still, there is a difference between voter restriction laws before 1965, and policies in 2017. It seems as America advances into the future, these racist policies and laws have become more subtle, gerrymandering and voter id policies have become the new literacy tests that prevent black and marginalized voters from voting in recent elections. Another issue that has transpired recently is the 2013 Shelby County V. Holder, which has lifted government involvement within the Southern States, giving them the power to change voting laws as they see fit.