LightNews LightNews
emrose1.bsky.social
@emrose1.bsky.social
95 followers 79 following 0 posts
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted
mjsdc.bsky.social
In her furious dissent, Jackson writes of the Supreme Court's decision: "The project of stymying one of the country’s great civil rights laws continues." She likens today's ruling to notorious decisions after the Civil War cutting back civil rights statutes. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p...
JUSTICE JACKSON, with whom JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR and JUSTICE KAGAN join, dissenting. The Civil Rights Act of 1871 was an exercise in grand ambition. It had to be. In the wake of the Civil War, the American South was consumed by a wave of terrorist violence designed to disenfranchise and intimidate the country’s newly freed citizens and their allies. The threat was existential—not just for the newly liberated, but for democracy itself—and required bold intervention. It was precisely because the goals of the 1871 Act were so ambitious that those most committed to the structures it targeted, including many in South Carolina, opposed the measure so vehemently. A century and a half later, the project of stymying one of the country’s great civil rights laws continues. In this latest chapter, South Carolina urges our Court to adopt a narrow and ahistorical reading of the 1871 Act’s first section, which is codified today at 42 U. S. C. §1983. That venerable provision permits any citizen to obtain redress in federal court for “the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws” of the United States. South Carolina asks us to hollow out that provision so that
June 26, 2025 at 2:13 PM