On December 1, after hearing close to two hours of debate on a Mississippi law that bans abortions after 15 weeks, the Supreme Court appeared open to upholding the state law.
In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court refused to block a Texas abortion law that bans abortions after six weeks, including in cases of rape and incest, and allows people to sue both clinics and individuals who help someone get an abortion.
In early July, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in favor of expanding religious and moral exemptions to the Affordable Care Act’s birth control mandate.
At the end of September, the nation’s attention turned to Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and the now-infamous hearing regarding Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations of sexual assault against him. While that Supreme Court-related news was obviously worthy of attention, it caused many to overlook the fact that just days later, the Supreme Court began its October sitting on the first Monday of the month.
The stories of the silenced matter, even when the outcome of sharing them are not necessarily concrete.
Dr. Blasey Ford herself has largely been seen as credible, which in turn appears to be a sign of cultural progress. Yet the public narrative that has been maintained about perpetrators has not progressed in tandem with this evolved view of survivors.
Often considered the “swing vote” on the Supreme Court, Justice Kennedy spent his 30-year career making arguably the most bipartisan decisions in the courtroom. Democrats and progressives had come to rely on him as a key figure in the fight to protect existing abortion rights at the federal level.
On June 4, right at the beginning of Pride Month, SCOTUS released their decision in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission: the court sided with the baker.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard the first oral arguments in a crucial case targeting Crisis Pregnancy Centers. Lizz Winstead of Lady Parts Justice explains why this case is so important.
The Masterpiece Cakeshop case isn’t really about cake at all. It’s about discrimination. This case could potentially lead to legalizing discrimination against the LGBT+ community because a couple requested a wedding cake and was denied.