Home / General / We’ve Got You

We’ve Got You

/
/
/
2313 Views

Another liberal Supreme Court Justice frantically waving their arms about the impending doom:

She teased pending decisions in cases about whether the census may contain a question on citizenship, and if the court would for the first time decide that a state’s electoral maps are so influenced by partisan gerrymandering that they violate voters’ constitutional rights.

Be prepared for sharp disagreements as the court finishes its work this month, she said.

So far, only a quarter of the court’s decisions have been closely divided, she noted. “Given the number of most-watched cases still unannounced, I cannot predict that the relatively low sharp divisions ratio will hold.”

[…]

Ginsburg noted census experts agree about the undercount, and that three lower-court judges have said the question cannot be added.

Then she noted legal similarities to a case from last term, in which she was in dissent.

“Speculators about the outcome [in the census case] note that last year, in Trump v. Hawaii, the court upheld the so-called ‘travel ban,’ in an opinion granting great deference to the executive,” Ginsburg said.

“Respondents in the census case have argued that a ruling in Secretary Ross’s favor would stretch deference beyond the breaking point.”

Ginsburg also mentioned the partisan gerrymandering cases — “very high on the most-watched cases list.” One involves congressional district maps drawn by the Republican leadership of North Carolina, and the other by Democrats in Maryland.

The Warren Court — or more precisely the less than a decade period during the Warren Court when the Court had a median liberal vote — has dominated how both liberals and conservatives view the Supreme Court for decades. Which is odd given that the Warren Court is an anomaly, and one that is likely to look a decade or two from now as a fairly extreme one. Historically, the Supreme Court has sided with anti-democratic factions in American politics much more often than it has opened the channels of democracy. The Roberts Court is in line with the dominant historical trend. And barring some incredibly lucky triple-bank-shot run of luck — basically, a Democratic president and Senate getting to replace Thomas, Breyer, and Ginsburg — a majority of the Court will be working to exacerbate rather than mitigate the anti-democratic aspects of American constitutionalism for the foreseeable future.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Linkedin
This div height required for enabling the sticky sidebar
Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views :