General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTPM: A Hamstrung SCOTUS Is About To Have A Mess Of Voting Lawsuits At Its Doorstep
A Hamstrung SCOTUS Is About To Have A Mess Of Voting Lawsuits At Its Doorstep
ByTierney Sneed
Published April 11, 2016, 6:00 AM EDT
The signs that the Supreme Court is grappling with a depleted bench are starting to show. But what has been a trickle of tie-votes, bizarre orders and slowed activity could turn into a series of orders with contradictory effects as the court is confronted with an onslaught of election-related litigation in the lead-up to Nov. 8.
As the last stop for lawsuits challenging voting restrictions and administrative practices, the Supreme Court would normally see an increase in those cases as the 2016 election draws closer. But the ideologically split court will be facing more than the usual uptick in requests for the justices to intervene in legal battles over voting laws. The 2016 election marks the first presidential election since the Supreme Court crippled the Voting Rights Act and ushered in a wave of voting restrictions now tied up in lawsuits.
The Supreme Court will be without its decisive ninth vote just as voting rights advocates will be asking it to come to terms with its 2013 Shelby County v. Holder decision.
Theres a lot of uncertainty in the field and with a court that is not full, there's concern that that uncertainty is just going to continue, Jennifer Clark, a counsel for the Brennan Center's Democracy Program, told TPM. That problem is only compounded by the gutting of the Voting Rights Act, which has created this whole new landscape where nobody really knows exactly what the rules that were operating in are.
more...
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/scotus-voting-lawsuits-shelby
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)I still can't believe he was nominated. Approved....yes. But why even put him up there?
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)But, the first line in a future historical rendering of the Roberts Court will be the usurping of the Court's power by another Branch IMO.
FighttheFuture
(1,313 posts)If one is looking at the scholarship and experience to be a Supreme Court Justice there are only two serving on the bench that meets that criteria. Those are Ginsberg and Breyer. As much as I disliked his decisions ninety percent of the time Scalia was also one. I view Thomas, Alito, Roberts, Kennedy, Sotomayor, and Kagan as marginal and strictly political appointments.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)aggiesal
(8,918 posts)for helping them steal Florida in 2000.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)They figure with one more rigged election they can complete the construction of a permanent dictatorship.
PeoViejo
(2,178 posts)...to turn the US into a Banana Republic.
'Family Values' and all that it entails.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)It was used to refer to banana-producing countries that were effectively ruled by a big corporation by way of a corrupt and weak government.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)PeoViejo
(2,178 posts)..you forgot the ruling Families that call the shots.
Qutzupalotl
(14,317 posts)They can't win fairly, and they know it.
Purrfessor
(1,188 posts)Anyone who thinks the Supreme Court was bad prior to Scalia's death, wait until it is packed with a solid majority of justices who are right-wing zealots: Tea Partiers in robes.
But at least a GOP controlled government that time-machines America back to the 1920s will ignite the revolution.
And if people are so discouraged by this reversal and accept what has been done to them, then what?
Kablooie
(18,634 posts)The discrimination will be allowed to stand either way but if the court is split at least the issue can be brought up again later. If a majority voted to let it stand it would be settled law.
HeartoftheMidwest
(309 posts)".. gutting of the Voting Rights Act, which has created this whole new landscape where nobody really knows exactly what the rules that were operating in are.
Feature, not bug.