The Conservative Litigation Industry

Remember:

• SCOTUS under Roberts frontloads cases to curry good press first before giving their Republican base, especially the conservative litigation lobby, the red meat they want at the end of the term;
• SCOTUS under Roberts only rejected the worst interpretation of the independent state legislature theory in #MoorevHarper and allowed for future litigation on the theory;
• SCOTUS under Roberts only ruled against Alabama in #AllenVMilligan because Alabama did not present (read: lie) well enough in favor of their current congressional map, but SCOTUS still allowed for future litigation to potentially gut Section 2 (see Kavanaugh’s concurrence).
• SCOTUS ruled that affirmative action may be justified if one writes an essay about individual impacts of race discrimination in one’s life, and that will likely warrant further litigation. A boon for the conservative litigation lobby;
• SCOTUS in #303Creative carved a religious exception to nondiscrimination laws that will also invite further litigation. Another boon for the conservative litigation lobby.

On 303Creative

The wrong question in response to the 303creative case is “can I deny service to right-wing Christians/Jews/Muslims”

The right question is “where in this country are dissenting people vulnerable to monopolies or dominance by businesses who support this decision and how can I help”

Catholic and Christian hospital, adoption, shelter and related systems who dominate whole regions of states should be delighted by this decision. They have a opening to drive a truck through nondiscrimination laws, with few federal options since we did not pass the Equality Act last year.

On Affirmative action

The ADOS movement, including its paragons such as Yvette Carnell and Sandy Darity, has demanded strict limits for reparations to descendants of antebellum slavery in the United States. In fact, it was one of the most rampant and angry demands directed by testimony to the California Reparations Task Force, which issued their final report on June 29; it was also supported by California Secretary of State Shirley Weber.

This Supreme Court ruling, which has struck down race-based affirmative action and inverted the 14th Amendment into itself, likely opens the doors for a redirection of affirmative action towards lineage-based affirmative action.