Liberals have reason to rejoiceRoundup
tags: Supreme Court, Liberal
Within just two days this week, the Supreme Court delivered a series of major victories to American liberalism.
Despite being a conservative institution headed by an appointee of President George W. Bush, the court shifted the legal winds toward the left with its rulings.
As Americans start thinking about who should be the next president, the Supreme Court protected an older liberal program, legitimated a recent liberal accomplishment, and inscribed a new civil right across the land.
If liberalism is a dirty word, this Supreme Court surprisingly didn't hear the news. When historians look back at what happened in 2015, they will point to these pivotal decisions as a turning point.
Protecting liberalism: In the decision that received the least attention of the batch, the Supreme Court validated a broad interpretation of the Fair Housing Act of 1968 which prohibits discrimination in the sale or rental of housing. This had been the third pillar in Lyndon Johnson's trifecta of civil rights legislation. The fight over this bill had been brutal, helping to stimulate a white backlash against the Great Society. The final measure had been a severely watered down version of the original proposal. Nonetheless, the Fair Housing Act was significant in that it gave the imprimatur of the federal government to the claim that discrimination in housing was illegitimate. ...
comments powered by Disqus
- U.S. Planned for Military Occupation of Cuba
- New picture emerges of Mata Hari, who faced firing squad 100 years ago
- Massive section of Western Wall and Roman theater uncovered after 1,700 years
- Fight over national monuments intensifies
- Martin Luther: Reluctant reformer who rocked Christianity 500 years ago
- Historian Keri Leigh Merritt defends activist scholars
- Historian digs into the hidden world of Mormon finances
- A historian who became a business professor?
- Allan Lichtman's response to critics of his book that makes the case for Trump’s impeachment
- "Do We Have To Fight Nazis Again?” asks historian Paul Ortiz