Home > Press Printer Friendly Bookmark and Share

ALLIANCE FOR JUSTICE RELEASES “SUPREME COURT PREVIEW”

Term that starts Monday could be “One Percent Court on steroids”

 

Press Contact
Richard Wexler richard@afj.org

(202) 464-7371

WASHINGTON, D.C., September 27, 2012—The United States Supreme Court term that starts Monday is packed with cases with the potential to restrict corporate accountability and limit everyday Americans’ civil rights and access to justice.  According to a report released today by the Alliance for Justice “the majority on the court is likely to live down to its full potential,” says AFJ President Nan Aron.

“With polling showing the public increasingly fearful that corporations are receiving favorable treatment, the Court risks drifting further from the American mainstream and jeopardizing the legitimacy of its decisions,” Aron said.

The report, available here, comes on the same day AFJ previews its documentary Unequal Justice: The Relentless Rise of the 1% Court, at American University’s Washington College of Law.  The screening, at noon today, will be followed by a panel discussion.

“The documentary describes a 40-year campaign by big business to put its thumb on the scales of justice,” Aron said.  “AFJ’s Supreme Court Preview documents how the campaign may reach its zenith in the term that starts Monday.”

During the coming term the court will consider whether:

  • Corporations and other actors committing human rights abuses abroad will be shielded from liability.
  • Efforts to ensure diversity on college campuses will be severely restricted.
  • Courtroom doors will be closed to class actions seeking redress for corporate malfeasance.
  • Employers who create a hostile work environment for women and racial minorities will be immunized from liability.
  • Lower federal court judges can punish debtors who go to court to challenge debt collectors’ abusive practices.
  • The federal government’s power to regulate water pollution will be undermined.

And those are only the cases already on the docket.  The court also may consider the validity of the Defense of Marriage Act which allows states to refuse to recognize same sex marriages from states where they are legal and California’s Proposition 8 which sought to prohibit gay marriage in that state.  The court even may hear a challenge to the heart of one of the signature accomplishments of the civil rights movement: the Voting Rights Act of 1965. 

“In short, decisions this term could harm the ability of consumers, victims of discrimination, victims of human rights abuses and many others to stand up for their rights in court,” Aron said.  “This could be The One Percent Court on steroids.”