The Supreme Court turned away Kim Davis' case, but Thomas (joined by Alito) wrote a jaw-dropping rant taking direct aim at Obergefell and suggesting that SCOTUS must overturn the right to marriage equality in order to protect free exercise. supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…
Thomas and Alito give a full-throated defense of Kim Davis, saying she was persecuted for her "traditional Christian values."
"Davis may have been one of the first victims of this Court’s cavalier treatment of religion in its Obergefell decision, but she will not be the last."
"Since Obergefell, parties have continually attempted to label people of good will as bigots merely for refusing to alter their religious beliefs in the wake of prevailing orthodoxy." -Thomas
Two Supreme Court justices have essentially said that Kim Davis is a modern-day martyr.
Folks, a round of applause for the attorneys—including @Public_Citizen's @pulvinator—who successfully opposed Kim Davis' petition by explaining that the case is way too messy to be a clean vehicle. Even Thomas and Alito acknowledged that fact. supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/1…
By the way, the Supreme Court took no action this morning on an Indiana case that seeks to let states discriminate against same-sex parents by refusing to place them on their child's birth certificate. It worries me that the justices didn't turn away Indiana's petition.
SCOTUS already ruled that states must place same-sex parents on their child's birth certificate. But Indiana is giving the justices an opportunity to revisit and reverse that decision, making same-sex parents legal strangers to their own kids. Background: slate.com/news-and-polit…
Marriage equality was on shaky ground before Justice Ginsburg's death.
It is now all but certain to fall if Barrett is confirmed—unless Democrats expand the Supreme Court. slate.com/news-and-polit…@Slate
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Oh no. SCOTUS just agreed to hear a case that the conservatives could use to end the Voting Rights Act as we know it. supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…
Background on the case SCOTUS just took up:
The 9th Circuit struck down two Arizona voting restrictions. It ruled that both laws had a disproportionate impact on racial minorities, and that one was motivated by racist intent, all in violation of the VRA. slate.com/news-and-polit…
Republicans hope to use this case as a vehicle to shred the VRA's most potent remaining tool: The ban on voting laws with a disproportionate impact on racial minorities.
John Roberts has wanted to kill this section of the VRA since it was passed. slate.com/news-and-polit…
I’m voting for @RobertWhite_DC and @edlazere in the DC Council at-large race. I believe they’re the most progressive, humane, and responsible candidates. I’m also voting YES on Initiative 81 to make the ban on psychedelic plants MPD’s lowest law enforcement priority.
DC voters: Be sure to vote for TWO candidates in the DC Council at-large race. It’s one race, but you pick two candidates. (I’m voting for White and Lazere.)
And be sure to flip over your ballot to vote on Initiative 81—it’s on the back and easy to miss. (I’m voting YES.)
On Initiative 81: This is a no-brainer. Our drug prohibition laws empower law enforcement to perform pretextual searches and abusive arrests. They fuel police brutality, mass incarceration, and systemic racism. Initiative 81 is a small but important step in the right direction.
By his own admission, Trump wants the federal judiciary to nullify enough absentee ballots to hand him a second term. He intends to select a Supreme Court justice who will help him achieve this goal. He wants SCOTUS to help him steal the election. None of this is even debatable.
Senate Republicans intend to help Trump steal the election by ramming through a new Supreme Court justice less than a week before Election Day. Trump plans to pick a justice who vote to nullify enough absentee ballots to hand him the election. He has publicly stated this goal.
There is no point in debating Trump’s plan because he has said it out loud repeatedly. We have every reason to believe that he will pick a Supreme Court nominee based on the candidate’s willingness to help him steal the election. He has admitted that this is a litmus test.
If Senate Democrats do not threaten to expand the Supreme Court after Republicans install a justice in the middle of an election (or during the lame duck), they will have effectively surrendered. There is no other proportional response. It’s court expansion or nothing.
Republicans established new rules: The party in power can use any tool at its disposal to seize the Supreme Court, within explicit constitutional limits. Democrats will solve nothing if they unilaterally disarm. They can either adopt the new rules and expand the court, or die.
Democratic senators who won’t support court expansion as a proportional response to this power grab should be treated as cowards and dupes of the right. Republicans have ruthlessly shattered all norms and principles to seize the judiciary. Democrats must respond in kind.
Hard to overstate how incredibly irresponsible it is for the ***attorney general*** to make up stories about criminals paying off postal workers to commit voter fraud. Barr is absolutely out of control.
AG Barr has gone off the rails. He is spreading dangerous disinformation about voter fraud designed to undermine the legitimacy of the election. And he remains the chief law enforcement officer of the United States. His slide into delusional paranoia is profoundly alarming.
Honestly, what may offend me most is that, over the decades, every state has adopted meticulous processes for printing, sending, and counting mail-in ballots, including rigorous security protocols, and Barr appears to know NOTHING about it. He just makes up paranoid bullshit!
Justice Hagedorn is emerging as the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s John Roberts—very conservative, but not a total nihilist. By voting with the liberals 4–3 to keep the Green Party off the ballot, he just saved Wisconsin from a complete election meltdown. wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/Dis…
If Hagedorn had voted the other way, Wisconsin would’ve had to nullify nearly 400,000 absentee ballots *that have already been mailed* and reprint millions more, invariably blowing past state and federal deadlines. Disaster narrowly averted. slate.com/news-and-polit…
Justice Rebecca Grassl Bradley, who previously compared Wisconsin’s stay-at-home order to Japanese internment, now compares the rejection of the Green Party’s faulty nomination papers to Alabama racists leaving black candidates off the ballot in 1968. wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/Dis…