The “B” in RBG could easily stand for “Bodhisattva” – a person who delays self-happiness out of compassion to save sufferings of others.
Zen is grounded in the Buddhist “Bodhisattva” path, based on the practice of the “transcendent virtues”: generosity, moral training, patient endurance, energy or effort, meditation, and wisdom.
Throughout her career, despite her small stature, RBG had a titanic influence on the law, first as the nation’s preeminent litigator for women’s rights, and more recently as the leader of the high court’s important liberal bloc.
Some of her memorable opinions in the Court’s majority:
In United States v. Virginia (1996) which struck down Virginia Military Institute’s male-only admissions policy as a violation of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
Ginsburg described as “presumptively invalid … a law or official policy that denies to women, simply because they are women, equal opportunity to aspire, achieve, participate in, and contribute to society, based upon what they can do.”
In Olmstead v. L.C. (1999) the Court ruled that “individuals with mental disabilities have the right to community-based housing under the Americans with Disabilities Act, provided that states have sufficient resources and treatment professionals say it’s appropriate.”
In Friends of the Earth v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (2000) the Court gave South Carolina residents standing to seek penalties for industrial pollution without having to prove injury, and even though the factory in question had closed.
In Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (2015) the Court ruled that states can try to remove partisan politics from the process of drawing political maps by creating commissions that take power away from elected legislators.
“Arizona voters sought to restore the core principle that voters should choose their representatives, not the other way around. The elections clause, we affirm, does not hinder that endeavor.”
But the following RBG dissents (opposing opinions to the majority of the Court) are legendary.
In Bush v. Gore (2000), Ginsburg said, “The court’s conclusion that a constitutionally adequate recount is impractical is a prophecy the court’s own judgment will not allow to be tested. Such an untested prophecy should not decide the presidency of the United States.”
In Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (2007), Ginsburg wrote the dissent in the 5-4 case, which denied Lilly Ledbetter the right to sue her employer for gender-based pay discrimination because of the length of time that had passed since the violation.
“Our precedent suggests, and lower courts have overwhelmingly held, that the unlawful practice is the current payment of salaries infected by gender-based (or race-based) discrimination – a practice that occurs whenever a paycheck delivers less to a woman than to a similarly situated man.”
In Shelby County v. Holder (2013), perhaps Ginsburg’s most famous dissent criticized Chief Justice John Roberts’ 5-4 ruling that struck down a key section of the Voting Rights Act, freeing mostly Southern states [Jim Crow 2.0] from having to clear voting changes with the federal government.
“Throwing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.”
In Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores (2014), Ginsburg wrote the dissent in the 5-4 case, which determined that family-owned and other closely held companies cannot be forced to offer insurance coverage for certain birth control methods they equate with abortion.
“Approving some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation could be perceived as favoring one religion over another, the very risk the Establishment Clause was designed to preclude. The court, I fear, has ventured into a minefield.”
When it came to sex discrimination, she presented men, not women, as the ultimate victims. Her logic being that “Almost every discrimination that operates against males, operates against females as well.”
Ginsburg argued on behalf of the men and won. But women won, too. By challenging laws that were based on outdated stereotypes of women, Ginsburg expanded the lanes available to women in American society. Justice Ginsburg achieved historical advancements for women not by Trumpian strong-arming or shouting, nor by McConnell-like political gamesmanship.
Rather, her approach was positively Zen.
Instead of trying hopelessly to force a new reality for women into being, she worked within the limits of the present moment to create meaningful change. And because of Justice Ginsberg’s patient endurance, women today can enjoy well-established rights that are supported by historical precedence.
This Republic is exponentially better because of the Bodhisattva-like “generosity, moral training, patient endurance, energy or effort, meditation, and wisdom” provided by Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
RBG – the Zen Master – will live on in all our lives – lives enriched by her gifts to our understanding of the spirit of our Constitution.
–30–
[custom-related-posts title=”Related Posts” none_text=”None found” order_by=”title” order=”ASC”]