[In-It] The opponent who turned the world over, RIP RBG

<Russ Vader Ginsberg: I ​​Disagree> On

the 18th,'Notorious RBG' ran away.

Obituary articles were posted in all media outlets in the United States, and memorial articles were constantly posted on social media.

Reminiscent of the death of a famous pop star, the public's passionate tribute to the death of US Supreme Court Ruth Vader Ginsburg.

The nickname'Notorious RBG', inspired by the famous rapper'Notorious BIG', is attributed to his move in opposing interpretations of conservative legislation.

He enjoyed such popularity as a'rock star' as a progressive supreme justice advocating for the human rights of minorities such as women and LGBT people.

T-shirts and mugs with Ginsburg's face were made, and his life was made of books and movies.

In Korea, the feature film On the Basis of Sex and the documentary Ruth Vader Ginsberg: I ​​Disagree (RBG) (later referred to as RBG) were released last year.

<The Attorney Who Changed the World> dramatically depicts Ginsburg, who studied at Harvard and Columbia Law Schools and graduated with excellent grades, as he grew into a prominent figure in the gender-segregated legal world.

<RBG> is a work that summarizes public achievement and personal life based on the 84-year-old Ginsburg interview, who became an icon as a progressive hero.

If the former showed the history of discrimination and the drama of victory through dramatic fun, the latter reminds us not only of the past that she changed, but also the strategy and direction of the struggle that should continue in the future.

Ruth met her husband Marty while studying at Cornell University.

In the 1950s, when she attended college, Cornell had a gender quota, so female students did not exceed 20% of the enrolled students.

According to Ruth Ginsberg's retrospective, her husband, Marty, was the only one of the many boys she met to show interest in her intellectual appeal.

Ruth, married upon graduation, goes to Harvard Law School.

Of the more than 500 male students, only 9 female students.

Professors often treated female students as invisible people, and the dean demanded an explanation of why they were there after taking male students.

There was always the pressure to represent women, not individuals.

Ruth graduated with good grades in law school, but due to the culture of not hiring female lawyers, she settled in college.

Based on their experiences of discrimination in the legal profession where women are always minorities, they are interested in the laws that protect the rights and interests of minorities, and in particular, they pay attention to the issue of institutional discrimination against women.

At the university where I was teaching, I became an expert in this field by opening a subject called'Women and Law' at the request of students.

In particular, it was revealed how the patriarchal system, which regards men as economic agents and women as guardians of the family, legally rationalizes discriminatory employment opportunities and unequal wages.

She went to the Supreme Court to take a lawsuit on behalf of victims of gender-based employment conditions and wage discrimination, and built a reputation by winning.

Ruth Ginsberg was primarily a lawyer in lawsuits dealing with cases where women and men were not treated equally.

However, the subject or beneficiary of the lawsuit he represented was not always women.

In 1975, for example, he defended a lawsuit against the parental protection of a man whose wife died in the course of giving birth.

After the loss of his wife, a man who decided to raise a child alone filed a lawsuit knowing that he could not be a beneficiary because the social welfare legislation only stipulates maternity protection.

In this case, Ruth Ginsberg proved that when the provisions of the law enforce the roles of men and women in society and in the family, the victims are not just women.

Moritz v. who became the subject of <The Attorney Who Changed the World>.

The Commissioner case was also a lawsuit alleging that unmarried men caring for their family members were unfair and were not subject to tax refunds.

Again, the role of care in the home was a problem arising from the provisions of the law limited to women.

When you see Ginsburg's life and work in <RBG>, you will realize two truths.

The first is that the Supreme Court is also a person after all.

This film takes a lot of effort into portraying the strong relationship between the Ginsburg couple.

One of the biggest factors that made Ruth's work possible was the couple's relationship, agreeing that women's work was just as important as men's, conceding and compromised at the right time.

Not only that, but Ginsburg's position as the Supreme Court was largely supported by her husband, who was successful as a tax attorney and had considerable connections in the political world.

The couple were close partners not only in private but also in public.

Second, the justices' work is very political.

Ruth Ginsberg was able to take the place of Supreme Court Justice, perform his duties, and be so loved by her because the goal of her decision was clear.

We generally expect colorless, odorless and fair judgments made by judges.

But in the end, it is humans who made the law and who practiced and interpreted it.

Myths and common sense when the law was created, the reality when it is practiced, and the environment when it is interpreted can all be different.

What kind of society the judge aims for is closely connected with legal interpretation.

<RBG> compares the differences between Supreme Court Justice Scalia and Ginsburg's views on the law to see what kind of difference the basic perspective on the law leads to.

Justice Scalia had a deep friendship with Ginsburg personally, but he was always a confrontational person in judgment.

In Justice Scalia, law was the origin of this society.

He always devoted himself to revealing what the purpose of the law was at the time it was made.

On the other hand, for Ginsburg, the law was the basis for shaping the future we should aim for.

He noted that when the law was made, women and people of color were always excluded from'we' in the provisions of the law.

So, I focused on coming up with interpretations for the future that these alienated subjects will create together.

The Korean title of this film,'I dissent', is a phrase taken from the last sentence of Ginsburg's decision as'dissenting opinion' in the Supreme Court ruling.

In Ginsburg's lifetime, the US Supreme Court had always dominated the conservatives with 5 conservatives and 4 progressive.

As a result, Ginsburg said that the reason for giving a minority opinion on the ruling is that even if the case cannot be changed right away, it could affect the initiative to change the law in the future.

In fact, there have been quite a few cases where his minority opinions have sparked the National Assembly's initiative.

Ginsburg's death has sparked a lively debate in US politics over the appointment of a new Supreme Court Justice.

The appearance of revealing the political disposition of the judges, supporting or attacking them seems very different from that of Korea.

However, rather than concealing the judge's hidden political inclination with the mask of'resonable justice', revealing it and debating it positively, rather than frustrating with the ridiculous ruling, will provide a healthier foundation for the court's justice to stand on. I wonder if it is made.

#In-it #In-it #Kim Ji-mi #Boiled movie

[In-It] "Check paternity every day"...

'The world of parents' in a joke