Shortcut Navigation:

AFL-CIO Now

Showing blog posts tagged with Supreme Court

The Supremes Flirt with Oligarchy: Winners and Losers of the Week

In our regular weekly feature, we'll be taking a look at the winners and losers of the week in the struggle for the rights of working families. The winners will be the people or organizations that go above and beyond to expand or protect the rights of working families, while the losers will be whoever went above and beyond to limit or deny those rights.

Read more and comment »

McCutcheon v. FEC Supreme Court Ruling 'Dangerously Broadened Its Skewed View of Money in Politics,' Says Trumka

McCutcheon v. FEC Supreme Court Ruling Is 'One of the Most Undemocratic and Corrosive Decisions in History,' Says Trumka

Reacting to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in McCutcheon v. Federal Election CommissionAFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said the court made "one of the most undemocratic and corrosive decisions in history with the Citizens United ruling."

Read more and comment »

The Market Isn't 'Free' if the Refs Consistently Rule for One Side

The Market Isn't 'Free' if the Refs Consistently Rule for One Side

One of the most often-repeated arguments against government regulation of the economy is that regulation limits the free market and constrains growth and innovation. The idea is that if corporations and individuals do bad things, the market will punish them and they won't survive and thrive. The argument does have a simple logic to it. Too bad the real world isn't simple and the argument fails to account for what happens in the real world.

Read more and comment »

How the SCOTUS Ruling on Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act Affects Latino Voters

Photo via the Adios Arpaio Facebook page.

The voting rights of people of color suffered a huge blow last week, hitting Latinos particularly hard.

The same day the Supreme Court invalidated a key provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that helped protect the right to vote for disenfranchised racial and ethnic minorities in select parts of the country, a top Texas state official made headlines by saying Texas would “immediately” enact a strict voter ID law. A panel of federal judges rejected the law last year, which it referred to as “the most stringent in the country,” adding that it would impose “unforgiving burdens on the poor.” Texas is home to the nation’s second-largest concentration of Latinos (9.5 million).

Read more and comment »

What Does the End of DOMA Mean for Federal Employees?

Photo courtesy vpickering

More information is coming out about the Supreme Court decision that struck down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Last week, we reported Lambda Legal's advice about the ruling and what it means. Now we have specific details about how the decision affects federal employees, coming from the acting director of the Office of Personnel Management, Elaine Kaplan.

Read more and comment »

States Move to Restrict Voting Rights Following Supreme Court Ruling

Bob McDonnell photo courtesy Gage Skidmore

Following the U.S. Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling in the Shelby County v. Holder case striking down a portion of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), several states immediately took steps to increase voter suppression efforts. The court ruled unconstitutional the formula used to determine which states and locales needed to get preclearance from the Department of Justice before making changes in voting process. In recent years, Republicans have ramped up efforts to limit the right to vote, particularly through the use of voter identification laws that require eligible voters to purchase state-issued IDs before they can cast their ballots.

Read more and comment »

So the Supreme Court Struck Down Part of DOMA. What Does That Actually Mean?

So the Supreme Court Struck Down Part of DOMA. What Does That Actually Mean?

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in a 5–4 ruling, a big step toward equality for LGBT families.  But now that part of the discriminatory law has been ruled unconstitutional, what does it mean for same-sex couples? Lambda Legal has a thorough guide to the legal ramifications of the ruling.

Read more and comment »

Supreme Court Strikes Down the Heart of the Voting Rights Act, but This Isn't Over

Supreme Court Strikes Down the Heart of the Voting Rights Act, But This Isn't Over

This morning’s U.S. Supreme Court decision effectively striking down the heart of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by a 5-to-4 vote is shameful and a major setback to democracy.

Fifty years ago, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. led the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, and I believe as he did that the “arc of the moral universe… bends toward justice.” But today’s decision twists that bend in the wrong direction.

Read more and comment »

Supreme Court Strikes Down Arizona Law Requiring Voter Registration Applicants to Prove Citizenship

Photo courtesy: the U.S. Military Academy at West Point

In a 7-2 ruling and a major victory for voting rights advocates, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday struck down an Arizona law that required people attempting to register to vote in the state to provide proof of citizenship. The court ruled the additional requirement, not required under federal law, was an overreach by the state. States cannot add extra voter requirements that go beyond federal law. The 1993 "motor voter" law was passed in order to simplify voter registration and only requires that potential voters state that they are citizens, under penalty of perjury, but doesn't require additional proof of citizenship. The majority opinion was written by Antonin Scalia, who said that federal law "forbids states to demand that an applicant submit additional information beyond that required by the federal form." The dissenting votes were from Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. 

Read more and comment »

Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Arizona About Law That Denies Legal Voters the Ability to Vote

Photo Courtesy of Jeff Kubina

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments today in the case of Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona Inc., determining the constitutionality of Arizona’s Prop. 200, a law that requires voters to present certain documents as proof of U.S. citizenship when using the federal form to register to vote at the polls.

Read more and comment »

Online Community

Take Action

Stop Fast Track

Sign the petition and tell Congress to stop the Fast Track bill, it's undemocratic and bad for working families.

Connect With Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Flickr

Get Email from AFL-CIO

Are you a union member?

GET TEXT FROM AFL-CIO

*Message and data rates may apply.

Facebook Favorites

Blogs

Join Us Online