September 28, 2005
National Radical Women Statement on US Supreme Court Nominee John
Roberts
Showdown over the Supreme Court:
Feminist anti-capitalist revolt—not Democrats—will secure liberty and justice for all
The death of ultra-conservative Chief Justice William Rehnquist
and retirement of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor
leaves two empty seats on the highest court in the land – and a
critical opportunity for working people to demand the
kind of judges who will advance our rights, not those of
corporate entities and theocratic zealots. President
Bush has shown whose interests he supports by nominating far-
rightwing judge John Roberts to replace Chief Justice
Rehnquist. This maneuver sets up O’Connor’s position to be filled by
someone who will likely continue her
"moderate" record – of limiting access to abortion,
opposing equal protection for gays, and favoring
religious school vouchers, mandatory sentencing and the death
penalty.
As the makeup and function of the Supreme Court comes under
renewed scrutiny, pundits, internet bloggers and worried
pro-choice reformers are debating what role Roberts will play if
confirmed. The answer is clear: behind his easy-going
style lies an extremist, fundamentalist ideologue whose resume is
permeated with legal decisions that rival those of
fellow woman-hating, anti-civil rights justices Antonin Scalia and
Clarence Thomas.
Hard-won reforms are under attack and risk further decimation if
neo-Puritan Roberts is confirmed. That’s why he
must be stopped.
But concerned feminists and other movement activists can’t depend
on the hopelessly discredited Democratic Party to
save us. We must get busy organizing in the streets to stop the
Roberts appointment, and to ultimately free the entire
U.S. from a system that reaps huge profits from the second-class
status of women, people of color, and workers.
Roberts’ record: A far-right smorgasbord
John Roberts’ legal track record is chilling. His career began in
the Reagan era by opposing school desegregation,
Voting Rights Act protections and affirmative action. Under Papa
Bush, Roberts argued for more religion in public
schools and against Title IX laws banning sex discrimination in
educational facilities. He opposed environmental
controls, favored denying school access to children of undocumented
immigrants, and fought enforcement of the Americans
with Disabilities Act for injured workers.
More recently, Roberts backed George W’s positions that accused
"enemy combatants" are not covered by the
Geneva Convention, condoning torture and secret trials, and urged a
more active judicial role in shielding businesses
from union and consumer protections.
Perhaps most telling is Roberts’ history concerning reproductive
rights. His nomination was trumpeted by the
violent anti-abortion rights group Operation Rescue, an organization
he defended in court. He backs the "gag
rule" that bans federally-funded family planning programs from
discussing abortion with their clients. And in a
1991 brief, Roberts wrote that Roe v. Wade was
"wrongly decided and should be overruled."
Losing strategies of establishment feminists
Given these rollbacks, it’s obvious that Roberts is unfit to
serve on the Supreme Court and should be adamantly
opposed. But liberal feminist groups like Planned Parenthood, NOW
and NARAL are waging an ineffective and downright
dangerous campaign by refusing to build a movement that can stop his
confirmation or the rising rightwing fundamentalist
tide. Instead, they employ single-issue scare tactics to fill their
coffers, then turn to lobbying the
corporate-financed Democrats to stop the onslaught on reproductive
rights and civil liberties. This despite the fact
that the Democrats have approved more than two hundred of
Bush's nominees in the past four years. Even pro-choice
luminaries Hillary Clinton and Howard Dean are going out of their
way to distance themselves from a woman’s
fundamental right to control her body by promoting the need to
"reach out" to anti-abortion conservatives.
In addition to shilling for the Democrats, lady bureaucrats in
the mainstream women’s groups – and their
opportunistic cheerleaders on the left – are trying to
demobilize the grassroots movement that is springing up
in response to the times. The message to the one million activists
who gathered in the nation’s capital in April 2004
for the March for Women’s Lives was: vote for anti-abortion rights,
pro-war candidate Kerry. Planned Parenthood
recently denounced clinic defenders when they mobilized to
counter the "Crusade for Life," a group
targeting California clinics to harass women and stage "fetus
die-ins" – ignoring the fact that it was
unabashedly visible protests that won abortion rights in the first
place.
The role of the courts: three branches, one tree
In a just world, laws and judicial interpretations would
unconditionally protect human life and liberty above private
property, and recognize all genders, ages and races as equal. But
under capitalism, the reverse is true. Far from being
a "neutral arbiter" of justice and one-third of a fair
system of checks and balances, the Supreme Court
upholds and promotes discrimination just as Congress and the White
House do, because these government bodies reflect the
priorities of the class in power. A federal government that puts
judges into office who advocate discrimination against
women, people of color, and queers, wages war for oil, and abandons
poor people devastated by Hurricane Katrina instead
of preventing such needless suffering can only be explained by
exposing its profits-over-people aims.
A grassroots blueprint for success
So what’s a frustrated rebel grrl and her allies to do? The good
news is that the courts can be influenced
by the public mood and workers' demands. With enough public
pressure, even conservative judges can make surprisingly
liberal decisions – as evidenced by civil rights legislation and
Roe.
Building a united-front activist movement to demand that
judges uphold and expand legal rights for all is a
good place to start. This will send a clear message to Senators that
nominees who don’t meet these criteria must be
opposed by any means, including filibustering.
An inclusive movement should include and represent the issues all
of those groups targeted by the rightwing and
religious fundamentalists – women, people of color, queers, youth,
disabled, elderly, immigrants, unemployed,
underemployed, unionists, and students. We are the majority – by
taking our demands into the streets, via sit-ins,
strikes and protests, we can slow down and stop the attacks on our
rights.
But ultimately, what’s needed is yanking the profit-driven system
up by its roots. Replacing it with a socialist
society based on sharing wealth would eliminate the need for bigoted
laws and imperialist wars and provide access to
education, childcare, medical care, pensions, and employment for
all. Since U.S. capitalism has failed miserably to meet
these basic needs, it is our constitutional right to
advocate a revolutionary change.
Radical Women trains women of all ages, races, and sexualities to
be leaders fighting for just this kind of powerful,
multi-issue feminist program. Our solutions and strategies are bold,
and prioritize the needs of the most oppressed.
Check us out at www.RadicalWomen.org or call 415-864-1278 to
get involved.
Issued by Radical Women National Office * www.RadicalWomen.org
1908 Mission Street, San Francisco, CA 94103 *
NatRadicalWomen@aol.com * 415-864-1278