Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #ISLTamici
Most recents (5)
The amicus briefs in the SCOTUS fight vs. the independent state legislature theory—Moore v. Harper—are now all IN. Together, they make a strong cross-partisan case against the ISLT that highlights big problems with Petitioners' presentation. Let's go! 🧵👇
@BrennanCenter
@BrennanCenter
The takeaways:
1. Opposition to the ISLT is bipartisan
2. The anti-ISLT camp is big and diverse, the pro-ISLT camp... isn’t
3. The weight of authority is anti-ISLT
4. The ISLT threatens major harms, which Petitioners ask the Court to ignore
@BrennanCenter
#ISLTamici
1. Opposition to the ISLT is bipartisan
2. The anti-ISLT camp is big and diverse, the pro-ISLT camp... isn’t
3. The weight of authority is anti-ISLT
4. The ISLT threatens major harms, which Petitioners ask the Court to ignore
@BrennanCenter
#ISLTamici
(“Petitioners” = the gerrymanderers from the North Carolina legislature who are asking SCOTUS to reinstate that state’s heavily gerrymandered congressional map by endorsing the ISLT.)
Fourth #ISLTamici Theme: The ISLT’s potential harms are significant, and the Petitioners are asking the SCOTUS to ignore them
One of the more alarming features of the Petitioners’ brief is that it never explains why, as a practical matter, anyone—the Framers, Americans today, the Supreme Court—should want what the ISLT is offering them.
Their brief amounts to a lot of “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain” hand-waving.
Third #ISLTamici Theme: The weight of authority is anti-ISLT
Let’s use history as an example.
Particularly after the Supreme Court’s rulings last term in Dobbs (on abortion rights) and Bruen (on gun control), history will play an important role in resolving this case.
Particularly after the Supreme Court’s rulings last term in Dobbs (on abortion rights) and Bruen (on gun control), history will play an important role in resolving this case.
The pro-ISLT side makes a lot of representations regarding the history. But none of these people are historians. And they rely heavily on a fake document to make their historical case (such as it is).
politico.com/news/magazine/…
politico.com/news/magazine/…
Second #ISLTAmici Theme: The anti-ISLT camp is big and diverse, the pro-ISLT camp... isn’t
There have been nearly 70 amicus briefs filed in the case—roughly two-thirds of them oppose the ISLT.
Joining the folks I noted above is a massive group of historians, law professors, U.S. senators, state AGs, secretaries of state, current and former federal and state executive officials, civil rights organizations, good government groups, and think tanks, among others.
The amicus briefs in the SCOTUS fight vs. the independent state legislature theory—Moore v. Harper—are now all IN. Together, they make a strong cross-partisan case against the ISLT that highlights big problems with Petitioners' presentation. Let's go! 🧵👇@BrennanCenter
The takeaways:
1. Opposition to the ISLT is bipartisan
2. The anti-ISLT camp is big and diverse, the pro-ISLT camp... isn’t
3. The weight of authority is anti-ISLT
4. The ISLT threatens major harms, which Petitioners ask the Court to ignore @BrennanCenter #ISLTamici
1. Opposition to the ISLT is bipartisan
2. The anti-ISLT camp is big and diverse, the pro-ISLT camp... isn’t
3. The weight of authority is anti-ISLT
4. The ISLT threatens major harms, which Petitioners ask the Court to ignore @BrennanCenter #ISLTamici
(“Petitioners” = the gerrymanderers from the North Carolina legislature who are asking SCOTUS to reinstate that state’s heavily gerrymandered congressional map by endorsing the ISLT.)
