Equality For All

Just yesterday on March 28, Ron Elving of National Public Radio published and very accurately titled an article, Reluctant Justices May Be Forced To Make History. The article touches on how the U.S. Supreme Court has faced very difficult and monumental hearings in the past that have forever affected the direction of our nation, and is now facing an issue that may very well have the same effect;  same-sex marriage. Elving notes that there is a certain level uncertainty which looms over the head of the court as they don’t really know “exactly how its decisions will play out — especially not in the long run.”

However, one thing that is certain is the drastic change in the attitude society has made in recent years in regards to this topic.  Elving writes, “As recently as 2008, every major Democratic candidate for president opposed same-sex marriage. This past week, Hillary Clinton joined President Obama and Vice President Biden in crossing over to the new party orthodoxy. So did half a dozen Democratic senators. As of this writing, only nine of the 55 senators in the Democratic caucus are still opposed to gay marriage.” This fact alone sheds tremendous light on what the future holds for this country. What was held as popular opinion just five years ago is a way of thinking that is now considered obsolete.

It is no accident that Elving includes comparisons to pivotal Supreme Court hearings such as Brown v. Board of Education in his article, as this is just a modern form of segregation we are faced with today. Who we choose to marry is nothing more than a basic freedom we should all be able to exercise as we please. The very notion that marriage is something that should only be shared between a man and a woman is simply unconstitutional. It is a belief that was derived from religion, and every American citizen is entitled to believe in whatever they desire. Even to those who are set in their traditional ways, equality is the wave of the future, and they will have to come to terms with it eventually. Just as Elving provides, “Republicans' base has yet to shift on the issue, but their leaders know that among voters under 30 support for gay marriage now crosses party lines.” So even if the opposition isn’t able to come to terms with it now, they are very aware of it and must do so at some point in the very near future.

Obama Expedites his Legacy of Diversity

The Huffington Post recently released a political article titled Obama Pushing to Diversify Federal Judiciary Amid GOP Delays, which was followed up by a left-leaning commentary by Kevin Drum just yesterday, March 3, called Obama Plans to Pick Up the Pace on Judges. Drum begins by admitting that while Republicans are largely to blame for the slow pace of the judicial confirmations during the past four years, Obama had indeed made very little effort to nominate judges during his first term.  However, he quickly goes on to point out that now as his reelection was strongly backed by women, ethnic minorities and gays, Obama is establishing a much higher priority on this process, as well as setting a new precedent, by focusing on nominating judges from a diverse range of backgrounds, genders, ethnicities and sexual orientations. I particularly enjoyed Drum’s comment about “how, you know, [Republicans] don't object to diverse judges, but they are concerned about whether this is just affirmative action in disguise, so maybe we're not getting the high quality of judges that we should be, blah blah blah.” Drum’s take on their comments was humorous, yet it accurately conveys how I felt about them too. They are basically implying, and admitting, that they do in fact oppose judges from diverse backgrounds because they actually believe that their quality is inferior to their own. That comment alone by the Republicans made me very grateful for the diversity Obama is seeking to better reflect our melting-pot population, because it makes it very apparent that we desperately need it. Drum’s commentary is obviously intended for a liberal audience, and I completely agree with the main point he wants the reader to take away, which argues that “[t]here are plenty of good judges with other backgrounds.”