scotusblog.com/2020/07/justic… I wasn't paying attention and vaguely took this to be an ethically deplorable but likely legally defensible rejection by the SC's. But, looking into it, I'm amazed. Florida has, very close to the election, created a situation in which thousand of voters 1/
have no way to know whether, by voting, they are 1) fulfilling their noble, civic duty or 2) committing a felony, likely to result in years in prison. As I understand it, it is undisputed that there is no way for them to know this. Yet "Purcell" is cited in favor of this? 2/
Can you imagine the stink if the voters were R's? I feel I must be missing something, because it was 6-3. What is even the colorable argument that this is NOT a clear case in which the SC needs to step in to right an evident wrong? 3/
O felicity of off-hand word choice. I guess I do know what the 'colorable' argument might be. 4/
