In a 6-3 decision, SCOTUS rejected the notion that state legislatures have unlimited power to determine the rules for federal elections and draw partisan congressional maps without interference from state courts.
How much effect will this have on existing congressional maps and upcoming elections?
It’s difficult to overstate how disastrous a ruling in this case going the other way could have been, on top of the corrupting influence of large amounts of money already involved in politics and how gerrymandered districts already are.
I agree. The Republicans control enough state legislatures that saying “state legislatures can just declare who the winner is despite the vote tally” would mean a permanent Republican House and Senate majority (with the Senate majority filibuster proof) and a permanent Republican presidency.
Thankfully, any such ambitions to subvert democracy in this manner have been paused for now.
Note, paused and not stopped. I’m sure the Republicans will try to find another way to present this to get the Supreme Court to approve of it. This is a win in a battle, but the war is far from over.
This session has really been sort of surprising when compared with last session. The 6-3 Republican majority last year really kicked the hornet’s nest, between the NY gun case and Dobbs. It seemed like now that the Court was firmly in the hands of ideologues they were just going to go YOLO and tick off every item on the right-wing wish list.
I have no way of substantiating this, but I have to wonder if the outrage that has arisen nationwide in the wake of Dobbs, along with all of the coverage of the various justices’ ethical lapses, is having a similar effect as FDR’s court-packing scheme had on the Court of the 1930s. His plan to add sympathetic justices to the Court to stop the string of right-wing blows against the New Deal failed, but it was a credible enough threat that it caused at least one justice to stop obstructing and allowed FDR’s programs to get through unimpeded.
Could it be that the majority is so uncomfortable with the heat it’s gotten the past year that they’re throwing cold water on their grander ambitions? If so, let’s keep up the pressure!
I don’t know about “the majority”, but I’m pretty sure Roberts has been twisting arms so that his legacy isn’t being the chief justice who presided over the downfall of the court.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Thank fucking god. That’s all I can say.
Of course the 3 opposed were the ones that were bought off by billionaires the most.
It’s difficult to overstate how disastrous a ruling in this case going the other way could have been, on top of the corrupting influence of large amounts of money already involved in politics and how gerrymandered districts already are.
I agree. The Republicans control enough state legislatures that saying “state legislatures can just declare who the winner is despite the vote tally” would mean a permanent Republican House and Senate majority (with the Senate majority filibuster proof) and a permanent Republican presidency.
Thankfully, any such ambitions to subvert democracy in this manner have been paused for now.
Note, paused and not stopped. I’m sure the Republicans will try to find another way to present this to get the Supreme Court to approve of it. This is a win in a battle, but the war is far from over.
As someone who lives in Texas this gives me hope that the state’s voter suppression tactics will be overturned.
Scotusblog opinion analysis https://www.scotusblog.com/2023/06/supreme-court-rules-against-north-carolina-republicans-over-election-law-theory/
Thank fuck
Shocking news. I fully expected them to sign democracy’s death warrant.
Paywalled. But is this the state legislature theory thing?
who were the 3 in the 6 v 3?
Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch.
Alito, Gorsuch and Thomas. Gorsuch has occasionally surprised me. Alito and Thomas can always be counted on to be horrible.
This session has really been sort of surprising when compared with last session. The 6-3 Republican majority last year really kicked the hornet’s nest, between the NY gun case and Dobbs. It seemed like now that the Court was firmly in the hands of ideologues they were just going to go YOLO and tick off every item on the right-wing wish list.
I have no way of substantiating this, but I have to wonder if the outrage that has arisen nationwide in the wake of Dobbs, along with all of the coverage of the various justices’ ethical lapses, is having a similar effect as FDR’s court-packing scheme had on the Court of the 1930s. His plan to add sympathetic justices to the Court to stop the string of right-wing blows against the New Deal failed, but it was a credible enough threat that it caused at least one justice to stop obstructing and allowed FDR’s programs to get through unimpeded.
Could it be that the majority is so uncomfortable with the heat it’s gotten the past year that they’re throwing cold water on their grander ambitions? If so, let’s keep up the pressure!
I don’t know about “the majority”, but I’m pretty sure Roberts has been twisting arms so that his legacy isn’t being the chief justice who presided over the downfall of the court.