So some of the plans include new tests that are related to what the job requires, and do not include standards, unrelated to job performance, that men can meet more readily than women. I remember one test particularly. The job involved was slide projectionist. As part of the physical test, the applicant had to carry a certain weight with arms raised above his head.
That posture was much harder for women than for men, and women failed that portion of the test disproportionately. But the weight that had to be carried was something like 18 to 20 pounds, about the weight of a year-old child. Women have carried that weight from the beginning of time, but not with arms lifted over their heads. Once you eliminate that element of the test, the women begin instantly to pass at least at the same rate as men.
Many of these job classifications and tests were set up one way without thinking—with no thought of including women. Eliminating such tests is part of the kind of positive affirmative action that does not entail rigid quotas, but estimates of what one would expect the workforce to look like, if discrimination had not operated to close out certain groups. Ginsburg commented on the importance and evolution of free speech.
When asked about her thoughts on the evolution of free speech rights, she said:. The Alien and Sedition Act, early on, severely limited free speech. That law was never declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, but it has been overturned by the history of our country since that time. The idea was there from the beginning, though. The opposition to the government as censor was always there.
Editor's Note :
But it is only in our time that that right has come to be recognized as fully as it is today. The line of cases ending in Brandenburg v. Ohio truly recognizes that free speech means not freedom of thought and speech for those with whom we agree, but freedom of expression for the expression we hate.
New contexts undoubtedly will arise. But everyone accepts that the dissenting positions of Holmes and Brandeis have become the law. That is where we stand today.
Accessibility links
Ginsburg said in her testimony that the Court should not strike down labor laws based on the freedom of contract. She was responding to questions about the Lochner era, in which the Supreme Court struck down a number of economic regulations — such as minimum wage, minimum and maximum hours, or labor union protections — under the justification of the Fourteenth Amendment and the right to contract. By Edith Roberts on Sep 17, at 7: For The Washington Post , Emma Brown reports that Christine Blasey Ford, the author of the confidential letter containing an allegation of sexual assault against her by Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh when they were both in high school, has come forward with her first public comments about the allegation.
By Amy Howe on Sep 16, at 8: By Andrew Hamm on Sep 14, at 3: Six current Connecticut judges argued before the U. Supreme Court between and Their recollections of those arguments — prepared by Judge Jon Blue of the Connecticut Superior Court for the annual Connecticut Judges Institute — present a portrait of the justices at work in an earlier era.
She remembers a marshal informing her that a nurse was waiting in the anteroom in case she went into labor. The first argument that day — in Wimberly v.
- Why Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Confirmation Fight Still Matters, 25 Years Later.
- From A Clear Blue Sky.
- Line Painting Business.
- .
By Andrew Hamm on Sep 14, at 9: By Edith Roberts on Sep 14, at 7: Kavanaugh, and the real disgrace would be if Republicans did anything other than move promptly to a confirmation vote. By Adam Feldman on Sep 13, at 4: Success in the Supreme Court is hard to define because it can be viewed in a variety of ways. Few attorneys have the opportunity to try cases there, and even fewer argue multiple cases. Part of success therefore is simply getting a case or cases to the court. With this caveat in mind, attorneys often view case outcomes dichotomously — as wins or losses.
A four-part series looking at how Trump is changing the face of America
This post looks at attorneys who have argued cases across the last five Supreme Court terms, from through It uses a dataset of attorneys and firms that was merged with the Supreme Court Database and focuses on regular players who have been most successful in terms of case wins. Full Calendar Submit Event. Judge Julia DiCocco Dewey argued before the court […]. Awarded the American Gavel Award for Distinguished Reporting About the Judiciary to recognize the highest standards of reporting about courts and the justice system.
Whitford and Benisek v. Lewis Symposium before the oral argument in United States v. Microsoft Symposium before the oral argument in Minnesota Voters Alliance v.
The Rise of the US Supreme Court
Mansky Symposium before the oral argument in Janus v. Search Blog or Docket. Posted in Event Announcements. Government asks justices to act in document dispute in transgender-ban case By Amy Howe on Sep 17, at 3: Posted in Featured , What's Happening Now. Posted in First Mondays.
SCOTUSblog - The Supreme Court of the United States blog
Monday round-up By Edith Roberts on Sep 17, at 7: Chief justice puts donor-disclosure ruling on hold By Amy Howe on Sep 16, at 8: Six Connecticut judges remember arguments before the U. Posted in Featured , Supreme Court history. Event announcement By Andrew Hamm on Sep 14, at 9: Friday round-up By Edith Roberts on Sep 14, at 7: Featured Posts Government asks justices to act in document dispute in transgender-ban case — Amy Howe.
That decision turned out to be very important. During his 34 years in office, beginning in , John Marshall helped shape and strengthen the Supreme Court.
- Bedtime Stories: 21 Years Behind the Mike at RNs Late Night Live.
- The Rise of the US Supreme Court.
- Home - Supreme Court of the United States?
- Irish Kiss (Kissin Cops Book 1);
One of his most historic decisions came in That year, Marshall wrote the opinion on a case called Marbury versus Madison. The case related to a man named William Marbury. He had been offered a government job at the last minute by an outgoing president. The new president and his secretary of state, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, did not want to give Marbury the position for political reasons.
But Marbury believed an earlier act of Congress required the president to appoint him. So Marbury took the dispute all the way to the Supreme Court. The justices at the time agreed that Marbury should get the job. But they did not order Jefferson and Madison to give it to him. Instead, the justices believed, the earlier act of Congress violated the Constitution. That decision was historic, not because Marbury lost his case, but because of what it said about the Supreme Court. Of course, the Supreme Court does not have any power to enforce its decisions. It does not have money or an army.
As a sign of the respect it commands, in the Supreme Court finally moved to its permanent home. The building is made of white marble, with tall columns and a long staircase.