Death of Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Probable Approval of Amy Coney Barrett
The recent death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on September 18, 2020, is almost too much to process. There is no question the open seat on the Supreme Court has inevitably set in motion devastating consequences and threats for all women and America’s future. Ginsburg often referred to as “The Notorious R.B.G., Champion of Gender Equality and Feminist legend,” has empowered a revolution supporting equality since the 1950s when discrimination based on sex was culturally dominant enshrined in law. When her career began, R.B.G. dreamed of a world in which women could hold her rights, be responsible for her mortgage, and pay off her credit card. Ginsburg turned these dreams into reality. With a heavy heart, it is impossible to articulate just how much her voice and power meant for better education, employment, housing, health care, civil rights, and environmental justice for the common good of humanity.
On the other hand, Amy Coney Barrett, Trump’s Nominee, is a devout catholic, conservative, and textualist. If confirmed, Barrett is most likely guaranteed to take Ginsburg’s position and oppose nearly every decision she has made. From what I can tell from her legal writing, Barrett does not seem to believe the Constitution guarantees women equal protection before the law, which is ironic, hence the position she is in. Barrett has benefitted from R.B.G.’s efforts, including her ability to attend law school, hold a job, earn money and open a bank account. However, Barrett has not been shy of her opposition to abortion and lack of support among the LGBTQ+ and minority communities. Barrett’s hearings, which started on October 12, will continue until next Monday, October 26 (the date she will most likely be confirmed.) Even though hearings are still taking place, there is no reason to believe Barrett will not be approved.
In Sherlyn Sandberg’s book, Lean In, chapter three explains that success is not an easy route, often requiring more paths, ladders, and steps than assumed, especially for women. In R.B.G. and Barrett’s cases, this analogy could not be more accurate. In high school, my government teacher explained that becoming a Supreme Court Justice is more difficult than being a professional football player and a nuclear physicist at the same time. Supreme Court Justices have arguably more power than any other government position; therefore, their decisions can affect society drastically. On page 78, Sandberg writes, “Gender stereotypes can make it hard to move into positions traditionally held by men.” From 1789 to 1981, there was not a single woman who served on the supreme court. In other words, government positions are almost historically occupied by males. I am not arguing Barrett is not properly qualified to hold this position- she most definitely is. I’m concerned, however, that her ideologies and decisions will only, in fact, push the effort women have been fighting for hundreds of years back even further.
On the one hand, the Feminist in me is excited and hopeful to see another woman on the court. However, by giving R.B.G’S “seat at the table” to Amy Coney Barrett, I fear women’s rights will not be looked after. People assume that because Barrett is a woman, she will vote to support them; however, it seems unlikely to be true. In 1991, civil rights leader Justice Thurgood Marshall passed away, and Clarence Thomas took his place shortly after. Thomas, a black man, was hostile to affirmative action and voted as a threat to Marshall’s previous decisions.
History has shown us that just because the Nominee falls in the same category as a minority does not mean they will support them.
Chapter 11 discusses the idea that women in the developed world are far better off than ever before, but true equality has still not been achieved. On page 201, Sandburg writes, “First off, we must decide that true equality is long overdue and will be achieved only when more women rise to the top of every government and every industry.” What is most frustrating is that this is only true if the women in power’s goal is to strive for equality in the first place. Women like Barrett and Phyllis Shafley, who oppose certain rights like abortion, act as a threat to the global movement of equality by utilizing their power in fighting against it. On page 205, Sandberg says that “the media will report endlessly about women attacking other women which distracts from the real issues…. We should strive to resolve our differences quickly and when we disagree, stay focused on our shared goals.” While it is heartbreaking to see women who do not support, fight, or believe in what is most important to me and millions of others, our voice still matters, and revolution by revolution, we will make a change.
As devastating as Ruth Bader Ginsbergs passing is, I have hope in her legacy. I believe that my generation and the ones to come will be the most educated, expressive, and politically woke people- after dealing with President Trump, Amy Coney Barrett, and COVID-19.
