October 2020 Howler

12 November 6, 2020
VIEWPOINT
The Northwood Howler
Examining both sides of Amy Coney Barett’s nomination
Upholding the integrity of the Constitution
By William Baik
Staff Writer
Judge Amy Coney Barrett was
met with a wave of criticism following
her nomination. Her strong Catholic
faith and views opposite Justice
Ruth Bader Ginsburg caught fire on
social media. However, there is much
irony in criticizing Barrett purely for
most of her viewpoints, as her consistent
track record means that Barrett
meets the qualifications to be a credible
Supreme Court member.
Barrett approaches judging
through a rigid adherence to the Constitution.
In due part to her clerkship
under former Justice Antonin Scalia,
her rulings rarely stray from what is
prescribed in the Constitution, evident
in her short career in the Court of
Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Her
dissenting opinion on Kanter v. Barr,
for instance, consisted of a 37-page
paper detailing the intentions of the
Founding Fathers in the ownership
of a gun. Though it is possible that
this unwillingness to shift with the
times is a fallacy in Barrett’s judging,
stricter judges are necessary to put
Keeping drivers independent contractors: Voting “yes” on Prop 22
ByYejin Heo
Staff Writer
Proposition 22 is a general ballot
measure that would exempt gig
workers in the ride-share industry
from Assembly Bill 5, making them
independent contractors rather than
standard employees. Californians
casted their vote on election day, and
it has now been confirmed that the
proposition has passed.
When gig companies like Uber,
Lyft, DoorDash and Postmates argue
for their workers, it’s because they
are genuinely worried about their
own revenue streams. But in this
case, the self-employed back them
up at their own accord by saying that
independent contracting is beneficial
for them. Even though most of
us have no horse in this race—since
most high school students are not gig
workers—it is preferable to listen to
the viewpoints of the people who
would be directly affected by this
proposition.
“It gives me the flexibility to be
around my mom and kids during the
day and early evenings,” Uber driver
Trisha C said on Drivers for Prop. 22.
“I have health issues that restrict
NBCnews.com
CENTER OF CONTROVERY: New Trump court appointee strikes conversation about constitutional law
a threshold on how far government
powers can expand.
This is especially true in an age
where progresivism, or social reform,
has emerged at the centerpoint of
politics. Questioning the extent of
our civil liberties are vital towards
a healthy democracy, but deciding
where the boundaries lay for Congress’
policies remains ambiguous
due to how the majority inevitably
fluctuates over time. It is impossible
to assert that Barrett’s addition will
suppress progress entirely or that her
future actions would substanitially
impact social reform.
Conservatives will hold a 6-3
majority over the Supreme Court if
Barrett is confirmed by the Senate,
giving opportunities to overturn landmark
cases. Roe v. Wade is the primary
case of concern, as its precedent on
the federal legality of abortion could
be flipped with Barrett’s personal
opposition to abortion. Barrett also
states Roe v. Wade is not “super-precedent”
as per her confirmation hearings,
meaning that the case is debated
enough to question if its original decision
should stand. The pro-choice,
pro-life debate remains a deeply contentious
point, but supporters of the
pro-life movement will find Barrett’s
nomination appealing.
A judicial confirmation on the
horizon encourages Republican voters
in swing states to participate in
the upcoming election. The possibilities
she presents in overturning cases
in favor of a conservative-leaning
population may likely spur voters to
cast their ballots. These votes look to
be particularly important considering
President Donald Trump’s 16-point
deficit to Joe Biden as per CNN’s
poll conducted from Oct. 1-4. The
Senate’s final confirmation vote is
expected to be around Oct. 26, days
before Election Day; her nomination
could end up altering the election outcome.
People are often threatened by
the prospect of ideas that do not align
with their own. Barrett’s stance on
several hot topics may perturb those
with opposing views, but her consistency
and assertiveness will ensure
that she retains the integrity of the
Constitution while serving on the Supreme
Court.
how long I can stand or sit, so being
able to stop when I need to is what
makes ridesharing perfect for me,”
Lyft driver Honey R. said.
“On the days that I am unable to
work, I don’t,” Uber and Lyft driver
Christine C said.
The driving force behind the
California Assembly Bill 5 that Prop.
22 is trying to terminate is California
Assembly member Lorena Gonzalez
who represents parts of San Diego.
Gonzalez was previously a labor
leader and organizer, which fueled
her proposition that more employees
would lead more people to join work
Anjali Mittapally The Northwood Howler
Destroying the road to equity
By Hari Srerramagiri
Staff Writer
“My most fervent wish is that
I will not be replaced until a new
president is installed.” This was the
sentence Justice Ginsburg prompted
her granddaughter to write before her
untimely demise. Trump, however,
has nominated a candidate whose beliefs
place every decision Ginsburg
has made in hopes of a better future
in peril: Amy Coney Barret.
Barrett, who thinks being gay is
a “sexual preference” rather than an
immutable part of identity that is not
chosen, and who repeatedly dodged
questions on same-sex marriage during
her U.S. confirmation hearing.
Coney Barrett, who does not believe
in a woman’s right to choose, and
who has indirectly threatened to overturn
Roe v. Wade decision legalizing
abortion. Rape victims, young girls,
underpriviledged women without the
financial means to raise a child. These
are the people who this decision will
hurt the most, and guess what? Barret’s
Catholic beliefs that “affirm the
teachings of the Church as truth,” regardless
of proven science and statistics,
do not solve their problems.
Barrett, who thinks guns should
continue to be legal, regardless of
their catastrophic impact on the lives
of young teens and the victims of racial
violence. She dissented in Kanter
vs. Barr, in which the appeals court
upheld a decision restricting the Second
Amendment rights of a felon
convicted of mail fraud, claiming
that this violated his Constitutional
rights. According to this reasoning, it
follows that any person convicted of
a major felony due to suspicious behavior
can remain armed, regardless
of an imminent risk of more dangerous
future occurrences.
Barrett, who has made questionable
decisions when it comes to
immigration policy, including defending
the Trump administration’s
rule denying immigrants permanent
residence if they are deemed “likely”
to use public assistance. Additionally,
she has refused to review cases by
immigrants applying for humanitarian
protections, which are essential
for immigrants to obtain deportation
relief and other benefits for quality of
life.
Barrett, who helped to block
the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission from stopping
an employer who was appointing
their employees based on ethnicity.
Columbus Dispatch reports this is a
decision which, in the words of three
dissenting judges, “deprived people
...of employment opportunities at
their preferred geographic location.”
During trying times, there are
some issues which test the intelligence
of leaders, some which test
their strength, and others which test
their basic human instincts. Following
the passing of Justice Ruth Bader
Ginsburg, President Donald Trump’s
instincts are in question, because the
differences between Barett and her
predecessor are stark. Ginsburg was
a strong woman who spent her life
battling adversity, unifying the liberal
block, and shattering the glass ceiling
for future generations of women
in politics. Meanwhile, Barett has
ideals that would solidify conservative
dominance on the Supreme
Court and restrict the passage of
liberal decisions. Some might argue
that my judgement is being clouded
by political opinions, but there is
nothing wrong with conservative or
originalist views. It is when they are
combined with a lack of empathy for
oppressed and minority groups that
they lead to catastrophic impacts. A
balance of liberal and conservative
judges leaves room for conversation,
while imbalance furthers the dogmatism
and polarization that already
plague our country.
All in all, this is not a political
issue, but a people issue. Barret’s
nomination threatens the lives of millions
whose freedom Justice Ginsburg
worked so hard to preserve and
protect. If she were here today, perhaps
she would say it louder for the
people in the back: “My most fervent
wish is that I will not be replaced until
a new president is installed.”
unions, which would make Gonzalez
more money in the end.
Gonzalez’s proposal for the bill
would codify into law the Supreme
Court decision made in the delivery
service company Dynamex Operations
West, Inc. versus the Superior
Court in April of 2018, which set
standards to determine whether a
worker is an independent contractor
or employee through a three-step criteria
process.
It was ruled that a worker is an
independent contractor if they are
free from direction from their company,
performs work outside the usual
course of the company’s business,
and is engaged in an independently
established occupation or business of
the same nature to the company.
After negotiating with other
legislators to figure out how to implement
the complicated bill, it was
signed by Governor Newsom in September
2019 and was put into full effect
in Jan. 2020.
Prop. 22 also provides benefits
in addition to the sought-after flexibility
of the job. It requires workers
to be paid at least 120% of California’s
minimum wage for the hours
they spend driving, and those who
drive more than 15 hours a week are
additionally compensated for health
insurance.
On the topic of health, Mothers
Against Drunk Driving has also
endorsed Prop. 22, saying that ridesharing
provides a safe, reliable and
convenient alternative to drunk and
drug-impaired driving, preventing
accidents on the road.
At first glance, Prop. 22 could
be viewed as a way for companies to
create a new class of workers to exploit
gig workers by cheaping out on
paying benefits to their employees,
but it isn’t a loophole for corporations
at all.
If gig workers become employees,
tech companies will have no
choice but to make services more
expensive, putting their businesses in
jeopardy since customers may not be
able to pay for the extra cost. Saying
no to Prop. 22 means companies will
also have to restructure their business
models to accommodate their newlymade
employees. Due to the economic
downturn created by the CO-
VID-19 pandemic, this is not an ideal
time for businesses to restructure.
With Prop. 22 passed, many
workers who need a supplemental income
will lose their financial safety
net overnight. For most workers,
ridesharing and delivery is a side job
for retired folks seeking work in the
community, caregivers with unpredictable
schedules tethered to a loved
one’s health issues and students with
pending timelines for their next final.
The self-employed have been ignored
for too long and it would only
be right it we gave them the voice that
they deserve.