Problems continue to arise for the president of the United States: the disaster of the exit from Afghanistan added to the fury of hurricane Ida and the Delta variant of the coronavirus became in late August a real threat to the economic recovery of the United States. When it seemed that Joe Biden’s presidency could suffer no more setbacks to overshadow its energetic beginnings, the conservative Supreme Court that was born during Donald Trump’s Administration proved to be an insurmountable wall to Democrat policies.
The legislative hell that the White House is experiencing, with a recalcitrant Senate that prevents it from advancing its agenda, has just gained the company of the Supreme, which seems destined to do the work that Congress cannot do, unable to pass immigration reform , implement laws that do not restrict the vote to minorities and maintain the moratorium on evictions in times of pandemic. The Supreme Court has been tearing down the social pillars promoted by the Democratic president on the basis of emergency procedures known as shadow dockets, a legal term that describes the measures taken by the court without an oral presentation of its arguments.
Under Trump’s government, the nation’s top judicial authority made many important decisions through this method, quickly resolving, and sometimes late at night, substantial issues that critics across the ideological spectrum found lacking in transparency in form. . When that happens, the custom is to assign the result to a lovable Supreme Court with the White House.
With this tactic, however, the court — extremely conservative after Trump’s latest appointments — dealt a severe blow to the Biden Executive in late August, agreeing with a Texas judge who called for the restoration of the controversial Stay in Mexico program, created by Trump and whereby tens of thousands of asylum seekers must await the resolution of their application south of the Rio Bravo.
The Supreme Court’s first attack on the Biden White House was joined a few days later by another decision in which the court, by a six-to-three vote, declared that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) did not they have the authority to declare a suspension of evictions, imposed at the beginning of August, which provided protection to 3.5 million Americans in places with a high incidence of coronaviruses.
The Supreme Court’s latest coup came last week when magistrates, who are in office for life, blocked by five votes to four the arrest of the new abortion law passed in Texas, which virtually reduces women’s right to interrupt to nothing. pregnancy in the state. The rule, known as the Texas Heartbeat Law [”Texas heartbeat”, em referência à suposta pulsação do feto], came into effect on the first day of September and prevents women from having abortions from the sixth week of pregnancy.
In addition, the law offers the possibility of a civil complaint for anyone who assists in the termination of a pregnancy and awards this complaint with $10,000 (52,000 reais). In the words of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, in its scathing disagreement with the Supreme Court decision, Texas “has delegated to the people of the state the task of hunting down bounties, offering them cash prizes for civilly pursuing the medical procedures of their neighbors.”
six against three
John Roberts, the Supreme Court president, forms, along with Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and the judges appointed by Donald Trump during his presidency—Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Barrett—the conservative wing of the court. Against them are Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer, who at 83 is the oldest member of the court. His longevity makes Breyer the object of a strong campaign by the Democrats to withdraw from office and Biden can nominate his successor, in order to prevent his nomination from passing into the hands of an eventual Republican Administration.
Since 2010, when the Supreme Court ruled that limits on electoral funding be eliminated, leaving private companies to contribute unlimited funds to support and oppose the various political candidates, the court has become more important to the Democratic voter. The way in which all the rulings of the main judicial authority can affect the conduct of the 2022 elections and the triggering of the facts, Joe Biden’s party can be bound by the unwritten rule by which voters who declare themselves not satisfied with the decisions of the Supreme Court are more motivated to go to the polls compared to those who are.