Today is an important day and MOST people don't know it...even I didn't realize it until I read a news report that 30 years ago today...President Ronald Reagan nominated Sandra Day O'Connor to the Supreme Court.
If you don't understand how significant she is and that moment was....then read this..
1. Justice O'Connor became the swing vote on the issue of abortion, allowing a narrowing of Roe v. Wade but refusing to overturn it. "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life," she wrote.
2. She was the swing vote in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, finding discrimination had been "a substantial factor" in a decision not to promote a woman to partnership.
3. She was the deciding vote in Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, allowing a whistle blower standing to sue for retaliation in gender discrimination circumstances,
4. and in Davis v. Monroe, allowing a girl who'd been subject to relentless sexual taunts by a classmate to sue the school for allowing the hostile environment to go unchecked.
Would the law be different had a man been appointed in her place? The weight of the voting record of other Republican appointees to the Court since 1981 suggests it well might be.
Thank you Honorable Justice O'Connor. Thank you.
Text from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/meg-waite-clayton/supreme-court-gender_b_891804.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009
If you don't understand how significant she is and that moment was....then read this..
1. Justice O'Connor became the swing vote on the issue of abortion, allowing a narrowing of Roe v. Wade but refusing to overturn it. "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life," she wrote.
2. She was the swing vote in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, finding discrimination had been "a substantial factor" in a decision not to promote a woman to partnership.
3. She was the deciding vote in Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, allowing a whistle blower standing to sue for retaliation in gender discrimination circumstances,
4. and in Davis v. Monroe, allowing a girl who'd been subject to relentless sexual taunts by a classmate to sue the school for allowing the hostile environment to go unchecked.
Would the law be different had a man been appointed in her place? The weight of the voting record of other Republican appointees to the Court since 1981 suggests it well might be.
Thank you Honorable Justice O'Connor. Thank you.
Text from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/meg-waite-clayton/supreme-court-gender_b_891804.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009
Peace,
AVIANA
AVIANA
RSS Feed
