The Supreme Court Is Trying to Kill Us


The Supreme Court begins its fall term today, and it’s already shaping up to be a doozy. Its docket includes public employee unions, affirmative action, the death penalty, and—oh, hell, why not?— probably abortion and birth control, too. While all of these are politically contentious issues with the potential to shape American lawmaking for generations, there’s one question that, as of today, has a definite answer. Is the Supreme Court trying to kill us? Almost certainly.

Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin pits famous white dumbass Abigail Fisher against the school she was unqualified to attend and could determine whether publicly-funded postsecondary institutions are allowed to consider race in admissions.

The Court is likely to hear Whole Woman’s Health Center v. Cole, a case that weighs whether or not a 2013 Texas law that aimed to close many of the state’s abortion clinics places an “undue burden” on women residing in its borders. A Supreme Court ruling that targeting abortion clinics for closure with the express purpose of making it more difficult for women to have abortions is not “undue burden” will, to put it mildly, royally fuck shit up for women unfortunate enough to live in places like Texas. Everybody cross their fingers that Justice Kennedy doesn’t eat some bad potato salad the day he hears those arguments.

Evenwel v. Abbott will also turn to Texas, ruling whether non-voting immigrants count as “people” for the purposes of establishing voting districts. Very cool.

But wait! There’s more. An anti-union ruling in Friedrichs vs. the California Teachers Association could potentially deliver the latest in a series of what pundits are calling “death knells” for public labor unions. Somewhere in his Wisconsin lair, Scott Walker has achieved his first erection since ending his shorter-than-a-Kardashian-marriage Presidential campaign last month.

Finally, the Court will likely hear (another) case challenging the Affordable Care Act, this time from the group Little Sisters of the Poor, a religious employer claiming that the very act of opting out of providing birth control coverage to their employees violates their religious freedom.

Despite the court’s “liberal drift” during its last term, nobody has the slightest idea how the high court will rule this time around. NBC News seems to think they’ll be more conservative, based on *reporter licks finger, holds it up in the air*. Al Jazeera speculates that perhaps the court will keep being liberal, also just because. The New York Times adds that Chief Justice John Roberts isn’t a fan of all of the bitchy dissents and catty judicial swiping and hopes everybody can just get along this time. The Times notes that there’s no reason to think the Chief will get his way. But, there’s also no reason to believe the Chief will not get his way. Basically, all speculation about what the Court will do is, at this point, based on nothing but a need to file an article about what the Court will do.

Rulings on the cases the Court hears during this session will come down in late June, right as the Presidential race is completing its metamorphosis from its larval silly primary phase to its screeching butterfly general election phase. These cases, no matter how they go, will certainly give us all something to scream about until we die of oxygen deprivation. Which is exactly what the black-robed sadists on this country’s highest court wanted all along.

Contact the author at [email protected].

Image via Getty.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Share Tweet Submit Pin