It's not just abortion: 5 issues likely to be affected by Kennedy's exit

[workinclasszero]

Major changes could be coming in areas where the relatively moderate Supreme Court justice had been counted as a crucial vote.
By JOSH GERSTEIN and JENNIFER HABERKORN 06/27/2018 10:59 PM EDT

1. Abortion
Kennedy’s retirement has put the future of abortion rights in the United States on the line.

During his campaign, Trump promised to appoint “pro-life” judges to the Supreme Court — a pivotal pledge that won him the backing of anti-abortion voters. Now, he’ll have the opportunity to replace Kennedy with a nominee who could reverse or dramatically alter the landmark ruling.

2. Affirmative action
Kennedy was seen as the sole voice among the court’s current Republican appointees who was open to race-based affirmative-action plans for public colleges and universities.

3. Voting rights and partisan gerrymandering
Kennedy has been far from a dependable vote for civil rights groups challenging voter identification laws or voting districts alleged to discriminate against minorities.

4. Gay rights
Kennedy has been the Supreme Court’s unrivaled champion of gay rights, rallying behind the cause even before it achieved widespread support in American society.

5. Death penalty
Kennedy had shown no outward signs that he was prepared to declare the death penalty unconstitutional. Indeed, he often voted to turn down last-minute stays, allowing executions to go forward.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/27/anthony-kennedy-retirement-supreme-court-cases-680104

[Midnight Writer]

1. I look for these issues to largely return to the states. The effect will depend on where you live.

[workinclasszero]

4. Well I live in a redstate so

I and my family are fucked.

[AlexSFCA]

2. even deep blue california voted to keep death penalty

obviously it’s not a simple
liberal vs. conservative issue unlike abortion restrictions that have consistently been voted against in this state.

[Solly Mack]

3. Just a reminder

Jim Crow laws were state and local laws.

Leaving it up to the states isn't exactly a comforting thought for anyone whose rights are at risk.

But I guess if you're not in the at-risk groups, leaving it up to the states seems not so bad.

[workinclasszero]

5. Bingo

[Solly Mack]

7. I'm in an at-risk group but a person shouldn't have to be at risk

to understand the need to not let regressive states decide the rights of people.

But it does too often seem like those that won't lose anything like to tell the rest of us to not worry.

[anarch]

6. exactly n/t