At the heart of a teachers strike in Los Angeles is a clash over what public education is actually supposed to do: provide equal opportunity or aim for more-equal outcomes, too.
In the battle against toxic partisanship in the United States, the Supreme Court hasn鈥檛 always been a shining light. That鈥檚 what made Tuesday so interesting.
Yesterday, a justice known for pro-business leanings struck a blow for worker rights. In fact, the whole court did, ruling unanimously that workers designated 鈥渃ontractors鈥 had the right to bring a class-action suit 鈥 essentially giving them a key right of full employees. What was most surprising, perhaps, was how Justice Neil Gorsuch ruled.
His judicial principles are built on understanding the original intent of laws when they were passed and upholding that original intent. In this case, using six dictionaries from 1925, he concluded that the law鈥檚 original wording ran counter to his traditional partisan framework. Then he ruled according to his principle. It wasn鈥檛 about making sure his side won.
By many measures, the United States Supreme Court has paralleled and even intensified partisan divisions, with justices increasingly ruling along predictable partisan lines in the most high-profile cases. This isn鈥檛 entirely their own doing, as presidents have looked for reliably partisan judges, and the Senate 鈥 and voters 鈥 have gone along.
The trend both inside and outside the court and by all sides in recent years has been to shape principles to fit partisan preconceptions. Tuesday鈥檚 ruling was a welcome reminder that it doesn鈥檛 have to be that way.
Our five stories today include a look at the world鈥檚 evolving moral compass in Africa, new thinking about what diversity is, and a unique attempt to change the outlook among Native American communities.