In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Obama is the way forward for women

Jill

However you feel about Catherine MacKinnon — I happen to like her even while I disagree with a lot of her legal goals — her Obama op/ed is awesome.

Women are at a crossroads in our struggle for legal equality as a means to social equality. Having women in politics matters, but it is crucial to have the policies women need. At this moment we risk losing ground gained, but we also have the opportunity to advance. At stake in this presidential election are the federal courts.

Despite inroads, women’s status remains characterized by sex-based poverty and impunity for sexual abuse from childhood on. The next president will appoint scores of lower court federal judges who will have the last word in most cases. One, perhaps three, justices may be named to a Supreme Court that in recent years has decided many cases of importance to women by just one vote. Equality can be promoted in employment, education, reproductive rights and in ending violence against women — or not.

The equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution is stalled. The fate of affirmative-action programs that have helped open doors for qualified women of all races may be vulnerable. The scope of Congress’s power to legislate — key to what a majority of Congress can accomplish for all our people — has become uncertain.

Existing laws essential for women’s economic survival have often been regressively interpreted. Women on average remain poorer than men, largely because of unequal pay. Recently, the Supreme Court held in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Inc. that plaintiffs must sue as of the first unequal paycheck, when they might not even know that their pay is unequal. Barack Obama supports restoring the rule, followed for decades, that allows suit for all the wage discrimination as of the last discriminatory paycheck. John McCain opposed this in the Senate.

We talk a lot of about the Supreme Court, but as MacKinnon points out, the lower courts are crucial too — and Bush strategically stacked the federal bench with right-wing judges. That’s going to pose long-term problems for our country’s legal system, and it’s going to be further exacerbated if another Republican gets into the White House. Women’s rights are in jeopardy across the board, and this election is a crucial one.

So check out MacKinnon’s op/ed, do what you can to help, and vote.

5 thoughts on Obama is the way forward for women

  1. In many ways, the US District Court judges matter more. They are lifetime appointees, and unlike appellate judges who generally sit in panels of three, they sit alone on a case. They determine how the law is interpreted and applied in individual cases, and much of what they do will be treated deferentially or will go entirely unreviewed. They are subject to confirmation, but their records don’t get nearly the scrutiny, and their views don’t get nearly the public airing, that a justice or even a circuit court judge’s nomination gets. If we want people to have rights in federal court, then, it is imperative to have a trial-level federal bench that respects ordinary people’s rights.

  2. By way of addendum, I practice in the federal courts all the time, and my view is that Bill Clinton laid down on the job and did a poor, haphazard job of puttng good people on the federal bench, refused to fight to fill all the vacancies and generally squandered the opportunity to counteract the invasion of Federalist Society ideologues and far-right conservatives. We can’t afford another Democratic presidency that lays down on that job; assuming Obama wins, we have to make him pay attention to the US District Court bench.

  4. Catherine MacKinnon makes some good salient points, however, I disagree with her opinion that Obama will do more for women. I think his position on women’s issues will remain neutral.

Comments are currently closed.