TheBrennanCenter OP t1_iynogad wrote
Reply to comment by Portarossa in We're Tom Wolf,Eliza Sweren-Becker, and Ethan Herenstein. We work on democracy reform at the Brennan Center for Justice. Ask us anything about the Supreme Court’s upcoming case Moore v. Harper and the “independent state legislature” theory. by TheBrennanCenter
The ISLT emerged as a serious threat to democracy once a few Justices of the Supreme Court began issuing writings suggesting their openness to, at the very least, considering it.
During the 2020 elections, litigants seeking to keep then-President Trump in office deployed the ISLT in cases designed to change which votes counted (for example, trying to invalidate certain mailed ballots). The Court rejected all those challenges. That could have been the end of the road for the ISLT. But a few Justices in concurrences, dissents, etc. suggested there might be something there.
Other litigants around the country picked up the signal. For example, in this case, the gerrymanderers have been trying to use the ISLT to defend their gerrymanders.
Because of this dynamic, it’s very important that a majority of the Court send a strong message in this case that the ISLT isn’t valid.
– Tom
Portarossa t1_iynquj5 wrote
Respectfully, that really just sort of kicks the can down the road. (That's probably on me; I could have worded it better.) What is it that made these Justices suddenly so open to promoting this idea in their opinions? Have the Justices changed their views on it (or at least found it suddenly more 'acceptable' to start discussing it openly), or was it baked into the nomination of people like Alito, Thomas and Scalia (and now the new batch of Trump's nominated Justices)?
I guess what I'm really asking is how far back this goes. It's easy to view the modern GOP as just throwing any old shit at the wall to see what sticks, as long as it keeps them in power -- and I definitely think there's a strong case to be made for that -- but it also kind of feels like it's been seeded for a long time, and we're now seeing the direct result of that because the Trump administration fluked/scammed their way into three SCOTUS seats in four years. (I guess the parallel would be with the overturning of of Roe v. Wade, where it seemed to fall apart very quickly but there's also evidence that the GOP have been setting up their little chess pieces for a long time through things like the Federalist Society.)
When we're looking for a cause for this -- and with the understanding that situations are nuanced and events are very rarely caused by only one thing -- is it a 'modern' (post-2016) issue, or do we need to be looking a lot further back into history to get the context for this?
Patrickk_Batmann t1_iyr3ue2 wrote
I suggest doing some research on “The Federalist Society”. That’s where the theory originated and that’s where all the conservative judges originate. There’s has been a concerted effort for 40+ years by the republicans and the federalist society to stack the courts with their judges. Remember, every single conservative judge said that Roe was “settled law” before they were appointed. They have no problems lying about their views as long as it gets them to power.
bobans30 t1_iyqvj3t wrote
Why would Trump try to win another election, he's worse than Hitler right? The mail in ballots are a sure way to fraud the election. Every voter should be supposed to vote in person, excluding the ones that are disabled and cannot move. Are the democrats really that desperate to keep power?
TheGazelle t1_iysfaqr wrote
What about people who aren't going to be in their electoral district when voting is done?
They just don't get a vote because they were on a business trip or visiting family?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments