A Woman’s Right to Choose

SG+attends+inauguration

Members of Student Government pose in front of the Supreme Court during their trip to Washington, D.C. to attend the inauguration of the 45th President of the United States, Donald Trump. (EN Photo / Rachel Iacovone)

By Rian Walsky
Staff Writer
 
With the tragic passing of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, it left an open spot for a new justice, who would be nominated by the president of the United States.
Since this year is an election year, it begged the question on whether or not the current president should be the one to appoint a new justice or if the responsibility should be held by the possible presidential elect, after the election takes place.
The last time a situation like this arose was when Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia passed away in 2016, it happened to take place during an election year and former President Barack Obama was told that he did not have the power to appoint anyone because it was an election year.
However, current president Donald J. Trump was allowed to nominate someone to take the seat that Ruth Bader Ginsburg once filled.
The woman that president Trump appointed and was sworn in by the Supreme Court, Amy Coney Barrett and could possibly endanger everything that Roe v. Wade protects.
Let’s take a look at the history of Amy Coney Barrett.
According to the Federal Judicial Center; she is an American lawyer, has been a circuit judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals since October 2017, has been a professor of law at Notre Dame, and has had connections to a small Catholic organization called People of Praise as well as Alliance Defending Freedom.
She has also clerked for Antonin Scalia who acted as her mentor before his passing and actually has stated that their judicial philosophy’s are similar; however, she tended to sway away from his liberal rulings.
When taking a look at what Barrett sees from a political standpoint, she is relatively conservative and has her focus on things that would be respected by the church.
One of the reasons that embedding Barrett into the Supreme Court could be an issue is because of her connections to Alliance Defending Freedom which has used religion to win court cases and fought against same sex marriage, they are even considered to be a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Separation of church and state has always been written in the constitution, but when you introduce a candidate who has shown to be very forward about their religion and being apart of a hate group shows that there might be a violation of that protection.
What is concerning is that Barrett’s connection and her current standing as a justice in the Supreme Court, could possibly compromise the ruling of Roe v. Wade all together.
Roe v. Wade was a Supreme Court case that was presented in January of 1973, which was introduced because Roe believed that her “right of privacy” or the 14th Amendment was being violated by being denied a safe and legal abortion.
In a 7-2 ruling, Roe v. Wade now protects a pregnant person’s choice to have an abortion without there being government regulation on what they’re doing, ultimately declaring that it is their body so therefore, their choice.
By introducing a candidate who is so strongly sided with the church, it could cause concerns in having the decision overturned endangering the lives of those who are trying to be protected under the ruling.
Other than her past with a hate group and religious background there is another issue with introducing her into the supreme court.
Although she is experienced in the field of law and understanding what the court of law is like, having a candidate like Amy Coney Barrett join the Supreme Court is dangerous, especially since she has no real past in ruling in a larger more serious court system.
Having someone under qualified in such a high position, especially one in the government can undermine the true duality of checks and balances; since there isn’t a true understand of how decisions that are made will affect everyone who lives in the country, decisions that are made may be based on emotion and the opinion of those who are tending to it, rather than what is better for the population, disrupting the balance.
Without an unbiased overseer, there is nothing stopping her and the other justices from stripping away abortion rights or continuing to take away human rights if they see fit.
By having Amy Coney Barrett apart of the supreme court there is a chance that everything that has been worked towards such as protection for abortions, women’s rights, and same sex marriage could be compromised.
Applying her own opinions or ethics to make certain groups such as Alliance Defending Freedom or People of Praise, would ultimately disrupt the integrity of the court of law.
Even though Barrett is already sworn in, there are things that we can do to continue to protect the freedoms that we have already fought so hard to protect.
Protesting and upholding our values is just part of the puzzle, continuing to fight for what you believe in may be the only thing protecting the lives of millions of Americans.