We've had lots of questions about what's going on in Harris County, Texas, and I'll be talking about it on today's Nightly Nuance. First, here's what we know as of this morning...
Harris County is Texas's most populous county, and it's quite diverse. It offered voters an opportunity to drive thru polling stations at 10 different locations -- 9 using tents and one, at the Toyota Center, using a parking garage.
Republicans challenged the legality of these locations, and the Texas Supreme Court denied a motion to stop drive-thru voting. One justice dissented saying the locations don't count as polling places under Texas law and impermissibly expand curbside voting.
Drive-thru voting continues and more than 127K people (including lots of our dearly beloved listeners) voted that way. A new group of plaintiffs goes to court to try to void these ballots: GOP Rep. Steve Toth, activist Steve Hotze (who has quite the backstory), and 2 candidates.
Yesterday, the Texas Supreme Court denied their motion (no comments, no dissents). Today, at 10:30, they're getting a hearing in federal court. They say that drive-thru voting is unconstitutional.
Even with everything that's happened recently (and that's a lot of everything), it is unimaginable to me that the day before Election Day a federal district judge, appellate court, or even SCOTUS would invalidate more than 100K ballots.
But we will be watching this develop carefully and keep you posted. Also, MAJOR kudos to @CGHollins @HarrisVotes for making an all out stand for enfranchisement.
Update: federal district judge says these plaintiffs don't have standing. It's certain to be appealed but for now, we're out of the woods ("the woods" being 127k people's votes being voided).

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with PantsuitPolitics

PantsuitPolitics Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @PantsuitPolitic

4 Nov
Good morning.
I'm not going to tell you to keep your chin up because I know how disturbed and discouraged many of you are. I know how disturbed and discouraged I am.

We are in for some long days as a country (I didn't think they could get longer but here we are).
Who do we want to be right now? People who pay attention. People who can share good information and counter bad. People who check and double check their sources. People who know what they're talking about.
What we know right now is that the House Democratic majority expanded. We do not yet know which party will control the Senate. We do not know who will be the president.
Read 7 tweets
27 Oct
Today's episode of the Nightly Nuance discusses Democratic National Committee v. Wisconsin State Legislature. With the caveat that any opinion from Justice Kavanaugh makes me act like a disgruntled pelican, let's recap with the Roses to attempt to numb the effects.
6 weeks out from Election Day, a District Court extended the deadline for counting WI absentee ballots postmarked by Nov. 3 to Nov. 9. In WI, you can request an absentee ballot until Oct. 29. With Covid, it takes ~ 2 weeks to return the ballot, so the math is...not hard
Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Thomas, and Alito voted to prevent the District Court's order from being enforced without giving us a majority opinion.
Read 11 tweets
26 Oct
I think there is value in answering these questions from @OrinKerr, so I will share that I favor expanding and otherwise reforming the court in every scenario below. We are a country of 300+ million people. The Court receives 7-8k petitions for certiorari each term. /1
That's too much for 9 justices and their clerks.The workload seems to be getting to the Court. Some of its most significant decisions are coming with no explanation. One paragraph orders in voting rights and death penalty cases don't cut it. This speaks to the need for reform.
Every time a Supreme Court justice retires, we are suspicious of the political timing. This speaks to the need for reform.

Every time a Supreme Court justice dies, we enter a political power struggle. This speaks to the need for reform.
Read 4 tweets
28 Sep
We recorded tomorrow's show this morning, and I've been thinking about why I had such a hard time getting my words under me (other than, you know, lack of sleep, overwhelming stress, and profound concern for the direction of our country).
We're seeing lots of messages from people that, paraphrased, go like this: Sorry, Sarah and Beth, but I don't have any nuance left.

And you know what? I don't have a lot right now either. I am beyond finished with the Republican Party and its leadership.
Where I preserve my nuance is for the distinction between the Republican Party and its leadership and people in life who adhere to aspects of what the Party or the President say they're about.
Read 9 tweets
28 Sep
The details of this NY Times story are bananas. So let's review, and imagine Kamala Harris reacting, shall we?
2014: "After tabulating all the profits and losses from Mr. Trump’s various endeavors on Form 1040, the accountants came to Line 56, where they had to enter the total income tax the candidate was required to pay. They needed space for only a single figure.

Zero."
America First? "In 2017, the president’s $750 contribution to the operations of the U.S. government was dwarfed by the $15,598 he or his companies paid in Panama, the $145,400 in India and the $156,824 in the Philippines."
Read 8 tweets
26 Sep
This coming week on the Nightly Nuance is RBG Week.
On Monday, we'll discuss at two cases involving women's rights and treatment under the law. US v. Virginia and Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co.
On Tuesday, we'll talk about the dissent that made her a cultural icon, Shelby Co. v. Holder. Justice Ginsburg said that the majority's decision to gut the preclearance requirement of the Voting Rights Act was like throwing away an umbrella in a rainstorm because you aren't wet.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!