Is there a silver lining? Con Law is relevant in my life again

I’m not a political/news junkie by any means. I’m often that one person in a room full of people whose response goes along the lines of, “Really? I had no idea!” My husband likes to make fun of my dramatic response, almost like that of a failed actress trying one last audition before she gives up her dreams of being on Broadway.

But the events of this past weekend have turned me into, well, everyone else in the 21st century. It’s not just the sentiments I angrily wrote about in my last past, which you can read here if you have not already, it’s also the fact that Constitutional Law, i.e Con Law as I and other wonks call it, is in the news again.

You might be thinking, “What? Since when have you been a constitutional law enthusiast?” Well, before I was on my current track of “I don’t know what I am doing,” I wanted to be a lawyer, more specifically, a judge. This was before I worked at a law office and had only my law classes in undergrad and my girlhood dreams to guide me. Con Law I and II by far remain my favouritest classes ever, well, other than my Philosophy and Religion classes. I loved it so much that I even served as an unpaid TA for the class a year after I graduated.

I loved learning the personalities of the Supreme Court justices that we studied and how they would use the law to advance their personal ideologies. It sounds wrong in theory, but it was so fun studying it. It’s very gosh-darn clever the way lawyers’ minds work – alas, I was not clever enough to follow in the justices’ footsteps, but whenever I hear “violation of the establishment class” or “due process,” it’s like music to my geeky/wonky ears.

I’m still angry about everything and finding out this morning that a mosque in Quebec City, CANADA has been attacked and that Muslims in PRAYER were killed, I’m angrier still.

Usually at this point, disgust and ennui lead me inward, but this time, I’m even more invested than ever. If this reaches the U.S. Supreme Court, man, it will be a showdown. If you don’t know anything about SCOTUS history (and if you care about American politics), you gotta read up on that stuff. It’s fascinating. Beginning with John Marshall pretty much saying, “Yeah Congress can make laws, but it’s the Judiciary that decides what those laws mean. So, eff you!” all the way up to recent court cases, it’s in the courts where real lasting change is made. Of course, I may be biased.

I do hope the conservative justices have a spine, unlike so many of our congressmen and women. Of course, there is still one vacant seat and we’ll see how things go this week, as Trump is expected to name his pick for the open seat soon. One thing is for certain, it ain’t politics as usual.

 

3 thoughts on “Is there a silver lining? Con Law is relevant in my life again”

  1. We’ll need your latent law talents now, more than ever, Rafia! You’re the hero that we need, if if you’re the hero that we deserve.

    The attack on worshipers as they were leaving evening prayers were…. there are no words to truly grasp the situation. I was crying at my desk when I read about the news. And then Spicer using that event to “justify” his president’s action? Even more heinous.

    I was asking an American friend about whether Trump can just ‘Executive Order’ his way through his term. I’d like to a “wonk’s” response to my question, though. (What is a wonk? Am i using the term correctly?). I’m sure whoever Trumps nominates for the vacant seat will not be half as qualified as Garland, if Trumps past appointees are any indication of what’s to come.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Haha, please don’t humour me any more than you already do. I didn’t even take the LSAT, Laura! It’s just appalling what happened. I’d like to say it’s because of Trump, but the French (and I include the Quebecois) many of them have some issues they need to deal with that precede Trump’s presidency. I attended an ACLU event yesterday and someone in the audience asked a similar question and the Director of the ACLU responded that he may be able to. He won’t get impeached unless he commits treason or a high crime. But I would hope the Congress develops a backbone, but that remains to be seen. I’m not really a wonk, I like to make myself sound more geeky than I am :( Gorsuch is qualified, if that’s any consolation, but it’s his ideology that is problematic.

      Like

      1. You are absolutely right about Quebec’s inherent animosity toward Muslims and other minorities. While everyone is quick to point the finger at Trump, Islamophobia and racism existed in Canada long before he came into the scene.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s