During the term of President Trump, and afterwards, depending on life spans of Justices, the Supreme Court of the U.S. could make major shifts on vital constitutional issues. In the CNN post, below, are the apparent favourites on Trump’s nominee list.
It’s fair to say that the nominees favour ( or favor, I guess) an “originalist” perspective – that the Constitution should be interpretted based on how the framers would have decided cases, or, at best, how the community at the time (1780’s) would have decided.
As well, or as a result, they are big on the need for the Courts to defer to government and executive policy and to deemed “political” decisions.
We are looking at a potential slam dunk for social conservative and populist legislators who will enact laws that conflict with the more modern jurisprudence on the Bill of Rights – possible subject matters – reproductive rights, LGBTG ss to services and employment, gun control, law enforcement and sentencing, the death penalty, regulation of immigration ….etc
One facet may well be approaches to prisoners’ rights in the US. There has been a gradual improvement in sentencing practices and, I believe, in the judicial review of prison decisions on prisoner access to release, reasonable preparation for release and to community contact and support.
I don’t think that 18th century folks would be particularly sympathetic in these areas.
Film at 11.