title:  The Top Ten Reasons We NEED A Liberal Supreme Court
text: One way or another, the passing of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia will change the course of American history.Scalia s death leaves the court with eight justices, four liberal and four conservative.The next justice appointment has the potential to determine the nature of the court for years to come. While a liberal justice will tip the balance in favor of progressive and liberal ideas, a conservative justice, like Scalia or worse, will tip the balance in the opposite direction.As we ve seen in recent years, decisions made the Supreme Court impact the lives of American citizens in critical ways.While there are an infinite number of reasons that we need a liberal court, here are the top ten issues most likely to be impacted by a change in the political balance of the court in the near future1. LaborLabor unions and the rights of American workers are facing constant attacks, both from billion-dollar corporations and the right-wing state politicians who represent their interests.In the immediate future, a liberal court could influence the outcome of Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, a case which has the potential to cripple organized labor in the U.S.The was argued before the Supreme Court in January, 2016, but a ruling has not been handed down by the court. In the case that the court s ruling was a 5-4 decision, the case will have to be heard again, once a replacement for Scalia has been appointed.2. Separation of Church and StateOn Tuesday, February 9, Rabbi Adele Plotkin was removed from a meeting of the Chino Valley, Arizona City Council. His crime? Protesting the council s on-going prayers in the name of Jesus.In defense of their actions, the council cited the Supreme Court s ruling in Greece v Galloway. In December 2013, the court ruled 5-4 that government officials in the town of Greece, New York, did not violate the Establishment Clause by opening meetings with Christian prayers.In May of 2014, the justices reversed their opinion in the case, even as many arguments remained unsettled.To understand just how  not settled  the case actually is, here s the overview from the 2014 case update:Judgment: Reversed, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Kennedy on May 5, 2014. Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas join the majority opinion except as to Part II-B. Justice Alito filed a concurring opinion, in which Justice Scalia joined. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which Justice Scalia joined as to Part II. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion. Justice Kagan filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, and Justice Sotomayor joined.This case is just one of many with the potential to erode or destroy the Establishment Clause, which prevents public resources from being used to promote religious doctrine, and protects all Americans from being forced to accept the religious beliefs of whoever happens to be running their local, state or federal government on any given day.3. LGBT DiscriminationOn June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court issued its historical ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, otherwise known as the  gay marriage decision. Since that decision, right-wing nuts across America have attempted to enshrine discrimination against the LGBT community into local, state and even federal law.Under the guise of religious freedom, conservatives have attempted to get away with everything from refusing service to gay couples to firing LGBT employees in the name of Jesus.As we ve seen in recent years, there s no end to right-wing creativity, when it comes to anti-gay discrimination. Whether they re trying to ban sodomy and oral sex or illegally refusing to sign marriage licenses, LGBT rights remain under attack all across the country.A liberal Supreme Court is of monumental importance in protecting the LGBT community from religious bigotry and anti-gay bias.4. Money in PoliticsA liberal court could open the door to restoring the integrity of U.S. elections.The disastrous Supreme Court ruling in the 2010 Citizens United Case has allowed unlimited amounts of corporate money to flow into our political system.In a 5-4 decision, the conservative court ruled that money is a form of speech. Under the pretense, the court found that limiting the amount of money flowing through the political system equates to suppression of speech on the part of the government.While the American public overwhelmingly disapproved of the court s decision in the Citizens United case, as long as the court maintains a conservative bias, there s little chance that the ruling will be overturned.There is plenty of room to challenge the decision with a liberal leaning court.5. Women s RightsThe rise of the Tea Party in America has brought with it an unprecedented number of attacks of women s rights.From state-enforced vaginal ultrasounds to disturbing attempts to exclude pregnant women from healthcare coverage under the Affordable Care Act, the right wing war on women threatens the health and well being of more than 50 percent of the American population.At stake in America is every woman s right to life, along with her right to self-determination and body autonomy. As the right wing continues to try to give more rights to a zygote than the woman whose body it inhabits, a liberal court is a critical last line of defense against these attacks.6. EnvironmentLess than a week ago, a 5-4 ruling by the Supreme Court temporarily blocked President Obama s climate change regulations from taking effect.As the New York Times reported on February 9,The 5-to-4 vote, with the court s four liberal members dissenting, was unprecedented   the Supreme Court had never before granted a request to halt a regulation before review by a federal appeals court.At stake here is much more than whether or not the president s efforts to reduce carbon emissions will become a reality.The case, brought by representatives of the fossil fuel industry, challenges the Environmental Protection Agency s right to create and enforce environmental regulations at all.7. HealthcareAfter years of legislative and legal battles over the Affordable Care Act, the Supreme Court finally upheld the Constitutionality of President Obama s signature healthcare law in 2012.But this decision has not stopped right-wing fanatics from attacking various parts of the law, bringing case after case to the Supreme Court, in an attempt to undermine the court s original decision.As recently as January, 2016, the court refused to hear another challenge to the law. The challenge was filed by an artist who said that being forced to pay for healthcare violates his rights. He was joined by Sens. John Cornyn (Texas) and Mike Lee (Utah), and right-wing nut Ted Cruz wrote an absurd amicus brief in support of the case.While a more liberal-leaning court will likely dissuade further attempts to overturn the law, the opposite would be true if Scalia were somehow replaced with a right-wing extremist.8. Voting RightsIn June of 2013, a 5-4 decision of the Supreme Court struck down the most important provisions of the Voting Rights Act.What s more, in a string of cases brought before the court in 2014, the conservative majority consistently ruled in favor of those who sought to restrict voting rights, rather than expand them.Rulings made it possible for states to introduce voter ID laws, although it s long been established that such laws negatively impact people of color. The same justices ruled in favor of allowing states to restrict early voting and restrict voter access to the polls.A liberal leaning court is vital to protecting and restoring the right of every citizen to participate in elections.9. ImmigrationIn January, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge to President Obama s executive actions on immigration.As the New York Times reports here, when agreeing to hear the case,The justices raised the possibility of a broad decision by taking the unusual step of adding their own question to the case, asking the parties to address whether Mr. Obama had violated his constitutional obligations to enforce the nation s laws. The answer to that question could significantly alter the scope of presidential power in realms far beyond immigration.Confident that the court s conservative majority would find cause to rule against the Constitutional authority of a liberal, Black president, the five right-leaning justices had clearly planned to take the lead in the case.The outcome of the case is likely to be entirely different, however, with a liberal-leaning majority.10. PoliceThe Supreme Court is regularly charged with the duty of defining what police can and cannot do under the Constitution.The five justices that made up the court s conservative majority have given police more and more leeway.For example, in June of 2015, the court expanded the rights of law enforcement officers to perform warrantless searches.Prior to that, the court ruled that a police officer cannot be held liable for violating a citizen s rights, as long as the officer claims he didn t know law.The court also granted immunity to police officers who shot a mentally ill woman inside a healthcare facility.While it s questionable that the addition of a liberal justice would influence the outcome of cases involving law enforcement, it certainly can t make the situation worse. Unfortunately, even some of the supposedly liberal justices currently on the court have sided with conservatives, helping to expand the rights of police, which necessarily means narrowing the rights of ordinary citizens.As stated earlier, these issues are by no means the only ones that will likely be impacted a shift in the political leanings of the court.President Obama has vowed to appoint a replacement for Justice Scalia, in spite of threats of obstruction from the republicans in Congress.Given that many of the policies that the president has fought for over the past eight years hang in the balance, there s little doubt that he will find a way to ensure that a liberal justice is appointed in Scalia s stead.Image credit: wikimedia commons