Let us start from the Fundamental Rights Federalism after the civil war. The Republicans in the 38th Congress enacted the 38th Amendment, eliminating the power of states to enforce slavery within their borders. But Southern states almost immediately used the rest of their vast police powers to enact Black Codes to oppress the newly freed slaves. Their aim was to come as closely as possible to restoring slavery in everything but name.

In response to this, the Republicans in the 39th Congress used their 13th Amendment enforcement power to enact the Civil Rights Act of 1866. Although they overrode the veto of President Johnson by super-majorities in both houses, some in Congress saw the need to write these protections into the Constitution lest courts question Congress’s power to enact the Civil Rights Act.

The Republicans thus created the Fourteenth Amendment. Section 1 forbade states from violating the fundamental rights of their own citizens, placing new federal constraints on all three branches of state governments. Section 5 granted Congress the power to enforce those constraints. With the passage of the 14th Amendment, the federal government could now prevent states from violating the privileges and immunities of their citizens; depriving anyone of life, liberty, or property without due process; and denying anyone equal protection. Following on its heels, a similar provision was enacted to prevent states from denying citizens the right to vote based on their race. The Reconstruction Amendments, taken together, thus ushered in what we can call “Fundamental Rights Federalism.”

Soon after its enactment, however, the Supreme Court systematically neutered the Fundamental Rights Federalism of the Reconstruction Amendments through such cases as The Slaughter-House Cases (1873),U.S. v. Cruikshank (1875), The Civil Rights Cases (1883), Plessy v. Ferguson(1896), and Giles v. Harris (1903). As a result, the powers accorded to the federal government lay dormant until the Court and Congress took them up again in the early Twentieth Century to protect economic liberties in cases like Lochner v. New York (1905) andBuchanan v. Warley (1917). Eventually, beginning in the 1930s until today, the Court largely withdrew from this area in favor of to protecting so-called “fundamental rights” and the civil rights of “suspect classes” like racial minorities.

 Courtesy of Constitution Center Org 

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg built her career on the fight for women’s rights. Before her days as a judge, she acted as general counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), where she argued over 300 gender discrimination cases—six before the Supreme Court—and cofounded the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project. As a civilian, Ginsburg earned a reputation as a dogged advocate for gender equality. As a judge, first during 13 years as a U.S. Court of Appeals judge, then during 27 years as a Supreme Court Justice, she built upon that legacy.

“Equal Protection” for women and men means males cannot be preferred to females.

Ginsburg took advantage of prior civil rights rulings on race—and male plaintiffs—to help illustrate why the Supreme Court should end gender discrimination. Many of her cases hinged on the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, which provides that people shall be equally protected by U.S. laws. Through a barrage of smaller cases, she chipped away at discriminatory laws.

But it was Reed v. Reed, a 1971 case for which Ginsburg wrote the plaintiff’s brief, that relied on the 14th Amendment. A minor, Richard Lynn Reed, known as “Skip,” died and his mother wanted to be designated as administrator of his estate. Sally and her husband, Cecil Reed, had separated. Despite Sally filing a petition first, Cecil’s application was automatically approved because of an Idaho statute that stated that “males must be preferred to females” when there was more than one qualified person available to administer someone’s estate.

Ginsburg argued that this violated the Equal Protection Clause. The Supreme Court unanimously agreed and struck down the Idaho statute. It was the first time the Court had ever applied the Equal Protection Clause to a law that discriminated on the basis of gender.

Gender-based discrimination hurts men too—Ginsburg argues her first case before the Supreme Court.

Another case that hinged on gender discrimination and government benefits was Frontiero v. Richardson. The 1973 case was the first Ginsburg argued before the Supreme Court. When a woman in the U.S. Air Force applied for benefits for her dependent husband, she was told she’d have to prove he was a dependent, even though men in the Air Force didn’t have to prove that their wives were dependent on them.

Courtesy of History.com/news

I cited some of these relevant articles to make more sense to in explaining the importance of what is at stake on this issue. Why suddenly the focus one politics of this elections suddenly change. Why when there's about 200,000 deaths and rising on Covid-19 without a vaccine, still with failed testing and no plan, and every single prescriptions now has a co-pay and even now is in danger of perhaps not even being covered due to pre-existing condition.

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear oral arguments on two cases challenging the Affordable Care Act a week after Election Day in November. This is the seventh challenge to the landmark health care bill in eight years, and if it is successful, it could have far-reaching consequences for health care in the United States.

This is the most priority issue at this point at this current Trump administration's ultimate goal from the very beginning is to struck and eradicate the Affordable Care Act's Protection to people with pre-existing conditions. This is nothing different to Trump's plan of Herd mentality of inoculation by contamination instead of a vaccine and using mask. 

From the Affordable Care Act, to Equal Pay, Voting Rights, Reproductive Rights, Immigration, Police Reform and so the next nominee who takes over Justice Ginsberg will be in this court after my lifetime in the next generations to come. This is why this fight is such a high stake for all of us. We all know how democracy works in America. It is up to us to act together and unify to make it happen.

May God Bless Us All in This Fight.

Alex Esguerra