The Supreme Court on Tuesday seemed unlikely to agree to overturn decades of precedent in a case about civil rights lawsuits, a result that would preserve the ability of individuals to use federal law to sue.
The justices had been asked to use a case about a nursing home resident who claimed a violation of his rights to more broadly limit the right to sue. The justices were told that result could leave tens of millions of people who have rights under federal programs including Medicare and Medicaid without access to the courts.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed out the repercussions of doing so. “Neither the federal government nor the states can possibly investigate and remedy every violation of these rights that are given to people,” she said, adding that federal law “speaks clearly” that people have a right to go to court. “Why shouldn’t we just respect our precedent?” she asked.
But the court has previously said that a section of federal law — “Section 1983″ — applies universally to give people the right to sue government workers when they violate rights created by any federal statute. On that narrower question, it wasn’t clear the court would rule Section 1983 lawsuits are permitted. Justice Brett Kavanaugh said that the nursing home legislation “says rights over and over again” but also noted that there’s a separate administrative process set up for people to complain when their rights are violated. “What’s wrong with an administrative process ... if it’s comprehensive and works?” He asked at one point.
Indonesia Berita Terbaru, Indonesia Berita utama
Similar News:Anda juga dapat membaca berita serupa dengan ini yang kami kumpulkan dari sumber berita lain.
California Supreme Court: Who's Running In The Nov. 8 General Election And Why It MattersUnlike the U.S. Supreme Court, California’s highest court is more obscure and rarely issues polarizing opinions.
Baca lebih lajut »
In Arizona, small tribe watches warily as Supreme Court takes up Native adoption lawThis week, the Supreme Court will consider whether to gut the Indian Child Welfare Act, which prioritizes placing Native foster children with Native relatives.
Baca lebih lajut »
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Issues Her First Supreme Court OpinionNew Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has issued her first Supreme Court opinion, a short dissent Monday in support of a death row inmate from Ohio.
Baca lebih lajut »
Illinois election: GOP has chance to swing state Supreme Court balance of power in its favorTwo elections for Supreme Court seats give the Republican Party a shot at a majority on the state's highest court for the first time in more than 50 years.
Baca lebih lajut »
Supreme Court considers fate of landmark Indian adoption lawIn a case steeped in American history the court will decide whether the Indian Child Welfare Act — aimed at preventing Native American children from being separated from their tribes — is tribal protection or racial classification.
Baca lebih lajut »
Supreme Court won't wade into dispute over prosecutor testifying at trial | CNN PoliticsThe Supreme Court declined on Monday to take up the appeal of a man from Louisiana who says he was denied the right to a fair trial when prosecutors called the assistant district attorney -- who presented the case to the grand jury -- to the witness stand.
Baca lebih lajut »