Supreme Court Sucks

In America, we are burdened with a positive/negative thing: The Supreme Court. In good times (read: when people understand the idea of precedent and facts), the Supreme Court has integrated schools and given minorities fair access to academic facilities along with making criminals aware of the rights afforded to them by the Constitution. In bad times (read: now), the Supreme Court tramples upon the rights of women to file workplace discrimination suits while pandering to corporate interests.

Today, the Supreme Court really pulled a fast one over on the high school students of America. While their rights are already being trampled upon by being forced to learn material that is of no interest to them while being groomed to take inaccurate measures of intelligence in the form of standardized tests, the high school student's right to free speech is now in question.

In the case, The Supreme Court determined that a school was allowed to suspend a student who held up a sign that said "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" while the Olympic flame passed through town. The student said that the phrase meant nothing, but the high school was certain that it was a reference to drug usage. The school suspended the student for ten days after he would not rat out his conspirators. He appealed his suspension to the school board to no effect. And he proceeded to file a civil rights suit against the school district, which brings us up to the present. It is also important to note that this sign was not displayed on school grounds, but, in fact, across the street from the school. Such an action places him on public property where free speech is allowed. But, according to the Supreme Court, this isn't really true. This leads to the question of where can high school students express themselves because this will allow for the schools to crack down on student publications, which were already heavily censored by administrations. If the Supreme Court has its way, high school students will become test-taking automatons. The sad part is, the Court's conservative majority, the side that decided this case, is still young.

While the Supreme Court has only been together for a year and a half, its mark is already being made to the detriment of America. Bad decisions that have limited the freedoms of many members of society. But, due to the Constitution, we can only wait until they retire from the bench because the Supreme Court is for life.

Your Bodies are owned by the Feds, Ladies

The Supreme Court came down on the abortion issue today, upholding a ban on partial birth abortion. In case you aren't familiar with this term, it is an abortion usually occurring after the 21st Week of fetal development. The cervix is dilated. Then the doctor goes into the uterus with medical tools to pull out the fetus. This is a very rare procedure, usually done with great hesitance and with immediate health risks to the mother.

I am not one to comment frequently on issues that concern how women use their bodies. That is not my issue as it is not my body. Women should be allowed to do what they feel is necessary to ensure their own well-being, which is what partial birth abortion does. While the child may be lost, the woman will be able to survive and possibly conceive again if they so please.

On this issue, President Bush said that the ban on partial birth abortion will allow a culture of life to be developed in America. Where do I start with this? Firstly, I thought that we, as Americans and as granted in the Declaration of Independence, are allowed liberty and the pursuit of happiness in this thing we call life. How does stripping women of a procedure that they can use to keep their lives uphold the principles upon which this country is founded?

Also, I don't know what right a bunch of men, with their non-birthing bodies, have to make decisions on the behalf of women. If you want to know what a woman thinks about this issue, you should read Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dissent, who is the only woman left on the Supreme Court bench. Whether you agree with her politics or not, you have to agree with the idea that the Government has no business in governing women's bodies and depriving them of a service that they could need to ensure their lives.

Racial Harassment

Today, the Supreme Court has decided not to hear a case on racial slurs in the workplace. According to the Los Angeles Times, Robert Jordan was fired shortly after complaining about a comment made by a co-worker following the capture of John Muhammad and Lee Malvo, better known as the DC Snipers. The White co-worker said, "They should put those two black monkeys in a cage with a bunch of black apes and let the apes [sexually assault] them."

If I were in Jordan's place, I would have been offended as well. That's an offensive comment. Period. Also, this was not the first time that the co-worker had made a racially insensitive comment, as Jordan found out from other employees. With little action available, Jordan reported his issue to the manager. He was summarily fired. He sued the corporation.

This case is now over as the Supreme Court refuses to hear it. But, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Paul Niermeyer said, "No objectively reasonable person could have believed IBM's office was in the grips of a hostile work environment." The lower court also said that an isolated racial slur does not create a hostile work environment.

As you can see, there are two primary problems with this issue. To deal with the 4th Circuit first, I do not know how saying letting two men get raped in a cage with black apes does not create a hostile work environment. That's liable to get me on a swearing tangent if someone said that in my workplace. To deal with the lower court, this was not an isolated slur as the employee had a history of making such comments. Counseling does not eliminate systemic racism. It is offensive to me that discrimination rules do not apply in racial situations. Racial discrimination is just as nefarious as sexual/gender discrimination and should be offered the same protections under the law. I am disappointed in the Supreme Court for not taking a positive step in ensuring that EVERYONE can work in a safe, trusting environment.