Nominal scrutiny
The Constitution defines neither marriage nor when life begins. Yet unfortunately, the definitions of these two issues are defining America today. The reality is the Supreme Court often defines and redefines the Constitution and our individual rights and liberties set forth within it.
The First Amendment grants “freedom of religion” without government interference. This amendment also states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Yet religion, particularly Christianity, is often referred to in the legal debates about defining marriage and when life begins.
Shouldn’t I be free of politicians and judges imposing their religious beliefs upon the most intimate and personal decisions of my life? It’s quite ironic that the Republicans have always peddled “limited government,” yet they have done their damnedest to interfere with the most personal and intimate decisions of marriage and childbearing.
The Constitution was created to spell out the limited rights or powers given to the federal government. It isn’t about what people can do; it’s about what government can and cannot do. So of course, anyone appointed to the Supreme Court should be asked a million questions about how they interpret the Constitution and the laws and rights which have been set forth in it.
The difference between the president or party in power and an appointed justice – as Alex Marra failed to recognize in his Nov. 14 article – is that a justice is appointed to serve for life. This term isn’t four or eight years, but on average 35, and the justice isn’t held accountable for his or her decisions through elections. The decisions rendered will affect my life and the lives of following generations for a long, long time.
Alito, like Roberts, has responded to questions regarding women’s right to choice as “settled law.” This is a cop-out! Plessy v. Ferguson, which defined separate but equal, was settled law, too, until Brown v. Board of Education. So yes, it is a huge concern to all women where Alito stands on women’s rights to choice and contraceptives.
As an American woman, I should also enjoy the equal right to self-determination as men, which the forefathers of this country envisioned for themselves and their offspring. How am I to enjoy this basic human right if I don’t have the right to reproductive liberty?
Of course, I don’t expect Marra or any other anti-choice male leader in this country even to begin to contemplate this inquiry. I will, however, continue to ask the pressing questions of Supreme Court nominees on their opinions of women’s rights, civil rights and human rights. The answers to these questions will continue to affect the lives and futures of every woman in America.
Save Roe,
Sara Duke
President, VOX @ VCU