I feel like they might have been wise to wait for a less fucked up SCOTUS before taking this before it.
It’s not a bad idea, as it’s something that needs doing but it’s unlikely to be passed as a federal law, and they’re kind of right that it is unconstitutional.
But this is bad timing.
Edit: It might not be clear that I was referring to the three women who are avoiding to the article taking freedom of toplessness to the supreme court, where I think they’re unlikely to get support with the court’s current constellation. Losing the case now might make it harder to get a similar case before a more favourable constellation of the SCOTUS in the future, so it’s not very strategic in that sense.
Then it was rightfully pointed out that the article was old, and they had already lost the case before the SCOTUS (in it’s current constellation). So indeed bad timing.
Maybe I wasn’t clear. Or maybe there’s an unpopular opinion in there. Dunno. Cheers.
Unfortunately, though the problem has gotten much worse in recent years, the theocratic leanings of the Supreme Court has been an issue for decades now.
The argument that this is gender discrimination seems obviously true to me so it’s shocking to me that we’re still living in a society where this type of government violence is still widely accepted. I just have to hope that we’ll eventually evolve beyond this type of Puritanism.
Thanks, I had completely missed that ruling. Of course four years ago would not have been any better than today - it’s the same SCOTUS.
Hopefully four years from now the situation will look different.
I still think this is a great possibility for the judiciary to step up, as I doubt federal legislators are going to touch this issue, and it seems pretty fundamental to me. Seems like it’s not the most welcome discussion in this thread though!
Good point, I think of the change in court composition as a very recent thing but time flies. It has been a few years at this point.
I hope you’re right that the lower courts will make more similar rulings but I suspect the Supreme Court might overturn it if they went too far. We’re just lucky Fort Collins ran out of money here.
Unfortunately, the court’s composition could take decades to change. It’s a big problem with no easy solution.
Unfortunately I don’t see any of the proposed reforms measurably improving things while the right has an equal or greater grip on power. Any reforms that are easily implemented are easily neutralized or turned against the left when republicans return to power. Which, in the current political system, is an inevitability.
More radical reforms could solve the problem but would require much greater political power. In my opinion this can only be achieved by forming a mass movement that completely overpowers the right’s institutional advantages. Whether this can or will happen remains to be seen but it won’t be easy.
I guess fundamentally the problem is with the electoral system and politics - it’s impossible to safeguard anything while knowing that a party like the GOP has a 50/50 chance of getting into power in four years.
I am not hopeful that electoral reform is on the horizon, but at least I think the GOP will collapse badly once their cult leader is dead and gone. :)
I feel like they might have been wise to wait for a less fucked up SCOTUS before taking this before it.
It’s not a bad idea, as it’s something that needs doing but it’s unlikely to be passed as a federal law, and they’re kind of right that it is unconstitutional.
But this is bad timing.
Edit: It might not be clear that I was referring to the three women who are avoiding to the article taking freedom of toplessness to the supreme court, where I think they’re unlikely to get support with the court’s current constellation. Losing the case now might make it harder to get a similar case before a more favourable constellation of the SCOTUS in the future, so it’s not very strategic in that sense.
Then it was rightfully pointed out that the article was old, and they had already lost the case before the SCOTUS (in it’s current constellation). So indeed bad timing.
Maybe I wasn’t clear. Or maybe there’s an unpopular opinion in there. Dunno. Cheers.
The article is 5 years old.
Shoot - I just read the article and saw the related links, but it didn’t occur to me that it’s completely out of date.
Did they ever make it to the SCOTUS? I guess not?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-supreme-court-refuses-free-144949699.html
Unfortunately, though the problem has gotten much worse in recent years, the theocratic leanings of the Supreme Court has been an issue for decades now.
The argument that this is gender discrimination seems obviously true to me so it’s shocking to me that we’re still living in a society where this type of government violence is still widely accepted. I just have to hope that we’ll eventually evolve beyond this type of Puritanism.
Thanks, I had completely missed that ruling. Of course four years ago would not have been any better than today - it’s the same SCOTUS.
Hopefully four years from now the situation will look different.
I still think this is a great possibility for the judiciary to step up, as I doubt federal legislators are going to touch this issue, and it seems pretty fundamental to me. Seems like it’s not the most welcome discussion in this thread though!
Good point, I think of the change in court composition as a very recent thing but time flies. It has been a few years at this point.
I hope you’re right that the lower courts will make more similar rulings but I suspect the Supreme Court might overturn it if they went too far. We’re just lucky Fort Collins ran out of money here.
Unfortunately, the court’s composition could take decades to change. It’s a big problem with no easy solution.
Yeah, it’s impossible to tell. But time flies - with four new years a lot could happen. :)
(Or it could be reformed. One could dream)
Unfortunately I don’t see any of the proposed reforms measurably improving things while the right has an equal or greater grip on power. Any reforms that are easily implemented are easily neutralized or turned against the left when republicans return to power. Which, in the current political system, is an inevitability.
More radical reforms could solve the problem but would require much greater political power. In my opinion this can only be achieved by forming a mass movement that completely overpowers the right’s institutional advantages. Whether this can or will happen remains to be seen but it won’t be easy.
I guess fundamentally the problem is with the electoral system and politics - it’s impossible to safeguard anything while knowing that a party like the GOP has a 50/50 chance of getting into power in four years.
I am not hopeful that electoral reform is on the horizon, but at least I think the GOP will collapse badly once their cult leader is dead and gone. :)
They didn’t lose their case in front of SCOTUS. SCOTUS just decided not to hear the case so the lower court’s ruling stood in that lower jurisdiction.