The Supreme Court wrap-up
July 6, 2022
Each year, Arizona Horizon looks back on the Supreme Courts’ most recent term to discuss how its major cases were decided. Joining Ted to analyze these decisions are Paul Bender, ASU Law Professor, and Stephen Montoya, Attorney for Montoya, Lucero, and Pastor.
“It’s probably been the most consequential term since I’ve been following the court. Certainly since the second world war,” Bender said.
Of the current Supreme Court Justices, three of them have been appointed by President Trump, according to the United States Senate.
“The court has used a completely different approach to deciding individual rights questions than it has been using,” Bender said.
This current court is not a conservative court, it’s an activist court that is leaning so far to the right that there is not enough representation, according to Montoya.
These are the four controversial cases that were discussed in today’s show:
- Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org. (6-3)
- NY State Rilfe & Pistol Assn. v. Bruen (6-3)
- West Virginia v. EPA (6-3)
- Kennedy v. Bremerton School Dist (6-3)
“The nine (justices) is not in the constitution. The nine (justices) should change to a larger number to make the court more representative. The court is out of control and the court is destroying itself,” Montoya said.
In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org., the court failed to take into consideration what taking the right to abortion away meant for women in this country and what it meant for life, according to Bender.
This happened in the hearings for some of the Supreme Court justices as well. Justices were not truthful with their answers on some controversial topics, leaving Americans to wonder what is true and what is not, according to Bender.
“What is the future of those confirmation hearings, you can’t believe anything they say, and what does that do to the supreme court process. It’s so important that people have confidence in the people that we put on the court,” Bender said.