Share this page!

Mark Joseph Stern Profile picture
Twitter logo
29 Jun, 4 tweets, 2 min read
As @ClaraJeffery has pointed out, RCV is ***not*** the reason for the delayed results in New York. RCV does not delay results. The wait is due to other factors, particularly a grace period for late-arriving ballots. Lowry's criticism is extreme bad faith.
fairvote.org/ranked_choice_…
Also, to claim that ranked choice voting somehow delays election results is to reveal that you have no fucking idea how ranked choice voting actually works. What absolute inanity. If he has the capacity for shame, which I doubt, Rich Lowry should be ashamed of himself.
What do conservatives think they have to gain by lying about ranked choice voting, anyway? It doesn't have a partisan valence. Or is this just another phase of their ongoing campaign to undermine confidence in the integrity of any election a Republican doesn't win?
I can only assume that Eric Adams is close enough to a Republican that when conservatives realized he might not win the race, they decided to delegitimize the vote. What a repulsive pack of lying sleazebags.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Mark Joseph Stern

Mark Joseph Stern 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 @mjs_DC

Mark Joseph Stern Profile picture
1 Jul
The Supreme Court's FIRST opinion of the day is in Brnovich, the Voting Rights Act case. It's a 6–3 decision with Alito writing the majority. All three liberals dissent. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf… Image
The Supreme Court holds that neither of Arizona's challenged voting restrictions violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
The Supreme Court weakens, *but does not eradicate,* the Voting Rights Act's "results test"—which gauges the impact of voting restrictions on minorities—in cases (like this one) that involve "vote denial" rather than "vote dilution." supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
Read 11 tweets
Mark Joseph Stern Profile picture
29 Jun
The Supreme Court's FIRST decision of the day is in Minerva Surgical v. Hologic. It's a 5–4 decision, with Kagan writing the opinion for the court upholding and "clarifying" assignor estoppel.

There will be more opinions. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
Minerva Surgical is another 5–4 decision with Roberts, Kavanaugh, and the three liberals making up the majority, for those keeping score.

The next opinion(s) could come from anyone except the three Trump nominees. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
While both Alito and Barrett dissented, they did so on very different grounds, and argued with each other over (among other things) what Scalia would've done in this case. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
Read 14 tweets
Mark Joseph Stern Profile picture
28 Jun
The Supreme Court takes up two new cases involving free speech and immigration and issues two per curiam decisions. Full order list here: supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…
SCOTUS' new cases are Austin v. Reagan National Advertising (another First Amendment case about sign regulations!) and Patel v. Garland (limited to question 1 below), which sounds like a @ReichlinMelnick case. The court will hear these cases next term.
supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…
Here's the big news: In what appears to be a 6–3 vote, the Supreme Court *reverses* an 8th Circuit decision that found officers used no excessive force when they killed someone using brutal tactics reminiscent of George Floyd's murder. supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…
Read 10 tweets
Mark Joseph Stern Profile picture
25 Jun
The Supreme Court's FIRST opinion of the day is in TransUnion. It's another 5–4 decision with Thomas joining the liberals in dissent—the second of the week!

There will be more opinion(s). supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf… Image
In an opinion by Kavanaugh, the court finds that most members of the class suing TransUnion for Fair Credit Reporting Act violations do not have standing.

Thomas is not happy!
supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf… Image
These decisions don't make the headlines, but they illustrate the far-reaching impact of a 6–3 conservative majority. Thomas has twice peeled off from the conservative bloc to join the liberals, but it doesn't matter because, well, Amy Coney Barrett. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
Read 10 tweets
Mark Joseph Stern Profile picture
23 Jun
The Supreme Court's FIRST opinion of the day is Lange v. California. In an opinion by Kagan, the court holds that pursuit of a fleeing misdemeanor suspect does not categorically justify a warrantless entry into the home.

There will be more decisions. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
Yikes, though: KAVANAUGH joins the portion of Thomas' concurrence sharply criticizing the exclusionary rule and asserting that it never applies to evidence illegally obtained in "cases of fleeing suspects." supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf… ImageImageImage
The vote breakdown in Lange is pretty interesting, but both Kagan and Kavanaugh question whether Roberts' Fourth Amendment analysis is actually different, in practice, from the majority's. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf… Image
Read 16 tweets
Mark Joseph Stern Profile picture
22 Jun
There is SO MUCH wisdom and fire in @LeahLitman @ProfMMurray and @kateashaw1's new law review article, but this passage in particular really spoke to me (and identifies a problem I am trying to be conscious of): repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewconten…
On the rule, created and enforced by heterosexual white men on this website *every damn day,* that your legal opinion is invalid if it arises from strongly held principles: repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewconten…
This is crucial. When <certain male commentators> want to police criticism of the judiciary, they often accuse critics of failing to understand some arcane aspect of the law—framing them as overly emotional amateurs who can't roll with the big boys. repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewconten…
Read 6 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!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @mjs_DC has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @mjs_DC!

Read all threads by @mjs_DC

:(