Right-wing extremists want to give state legislatures power to overturn federal elections — and finish what they started after the 2020 election. How? Here’s their scheme.
First, years of gerrymandering and dark money have built obedient Republican state legislatures — just look what red states did to abortion rights.
Next they turn to The Court That Dark Money Built. Years of packing extremists onto the Court and political pressure have brought an obedient Court supermajority to power.
Then they send in dark-money front groups like the Honest Elections Project, which has filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court that lays out the plan. Who is this group?
Honest Elections Project calls itself a “nonpartisan organization devoted to supporting the right of every lawful voter to participate in free and honest elections.” Wrong. This group promotes voter suppression under the guise of “election integrity.”
Now look at the “independent state legislature” theory that this group is pushing, which says that the Constitution forbids state courts to block any law state legislatures pass about federal elections – even if the laws violate the state constitution.
Rings a bell? It’s the theory pushed by Trumpster John Eastman to overturn the 2020 election (he also filed an amicus brief in this case). If the GOP justices go along, it would unwind our democracy as we know it.
Under this theory, radical, gerrymandered state legislatures could try to impose almost any voting restrictions. It could end independent commissions that prevent gerrymandering and other laws that protect voting rights.
And extremists like Eastman hope that it would even let them pick election winners, overriding the state’s popular vote.
The fringe doctrine they’re pushing first cropped up in — of all places — Bush v. Gore (three FedSoc Justices were involved in Bush v Gore, btw), but SCOTUS never adopted it. Yet three R justices (Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch) have endorsed it.
The extremists think they won’t need to sack the Capitol next time. Just (illegally) fix the vote in Republican state legislatures and run it up to the captured Supreme Court for a rubber stamp. Bingo — Bush v. Gore 2.0.
This is what the Scheme to capture SCOTUS was for: creating a captured Court amenable to extreme ideologies that serve Republican big donor interests.
Who was behind this Scheme? The same guy behind the Honest Elections Project: Leonard Leo, who from his Federalist Society perch stocked the Court with Roberts, Alito, and three Trump justices.
And Leo’s Honest Elections Project isn’t even a real group. It’s a legal “fictitious name” of another group that also operates under other “fictitious names,” including the Judicial Crisis Network.
The Judicial Crisis Network took in checks as big as $17 million to run TV political ads for Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett. The whole Court Capture Scheme looks to have cost more than $580 million — the big donors weren’t messing around.
The Federalist Society became their dark-money turnstile, grooming and selecting loyal judges. How do we know? Trump plus his White House Counsel plus FedSoc founder plus a Republican Senate Judiciary chair all bragged about it. Not subtle.
Recap: the Justices put on the Court via Leo’s FedSoc are getting marching orders from Leo’s Honest Elections Project, which under a different “fictitious name” also funded the TV ads to confirm the Justices. Not normal.
To cap it all off: Leo also just got a $1.6B political slush fund from a far-right billionaire to influence our politics using right-wing dark money schemes. It worked for Court capture; what’s next?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
With Emil Bove safely through his sham Senate confirmation proceedings, the two Trump judges just lifted the three-months-long administrative stay that had kept any evidence of Bove’s contempt of court bottled up.
It gets worse: the two Trump judges then used “mandamus” to undo the district court’s unappealable order and halt the contempt proceedings entirely. First, abuse of administrative stay, then abuse of mandamus, to shield Trump mischief from review.
At all costs, judicial inquiry into Trump Department of Justice contempt had to be stopped, even the MAGA AG trying to “create a conflict” with a bizarre ethics complaint against the United States district judge. Two Trump judges did the deed.
So he’d understand the full scenario that just touched the Judicial Conference (the administrative body of judges that oversees the operations of the Judicial Branch), which he convenes and chairs.
🧵
The saga begins with the much-reported battle over illegal deportations that played out in federal court, in the courtroom of Chief Judge Boasberg of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, a respected veteran of decades on the bench.
Federal judges, particularly senior and respected ones, aren’t used to being conned, tricked or lied to, particularly not by the government. DOJ’s conduct in the deportation proceedings caused Boasberg to find probable cause of criminal contempt.
Republicans are saying that our opposition to Trump nominees is “unprecedented.” Seriously? Let’s take a look at some of the stuff that is really “unprecedented”:
A partisan rescissions bill pulling back funding that was agreed to by both sides in bipartisan appropriations agreements.
Over-ruling the Parliamentarian to destroy emissions standards to let their Big Oil donors sell more gasoline.
Appointing to a United States Court of Appeals a character involved in three prosecutorial misconduct episodes in six months, and a subject of pending contempt of court proceedings.
A disappearing IG complaint about Emil Bove? What, “the dog ate it”? This Emil Bove mess could not smell much worse, until you sniff out the rest of the story.
This was a guy who set the all-time Department of Justice record for prosecutorial misconduct, with three significant episodes in six months (plus whatever cover-up he did of Jeffrey Epstein’s files — he wouldn’t answer). Nothing even comes close.
A misconduct complaint from the New York Bar was referred to the Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility, which never acted on it. (Bondi had cleared out the career OPR person and put in a MAGA person, so I doubt it got a hard look.)
Here’s one easy question for Trump criminal lawyer Todd Blanche to have asked Ghislaine Maxwell: “How did Donald Trump’s letter for Jeffrey Epstein’s birthday book come to be in the book?”
The Wall Street Journal reported that it was Maxwell who put the birthday book together for Epstein. We have seen her note to Epstein confirming that it was her. She would be the one who obtained the raunchy letter from Trump for his pal. wsj.com/us-news/jeffre…
Trump, however, only weeks ago denied that he provided the letter, saying variously that it was “nonexistent” and “fake.” Here was a good chance for Blanche to confirm Trump’s story. Unless, of course, Trump was lying. If that’s the case, don’t ask.
Ghislaine Maxwell has asked through her attorney for immunity regarding her possible testimony to Congress.
Her attorney is also talking about clemency for her.
Remember, immunity and clemency are two different things.
🧵
An immunity deal protects her from further criminal prosecution arising out of anything she discloses in her immunized testimony.
Most obviously, that would be immunity from perjury charges for lying under oath on a material matter in her testimony.
The Supreme Court’s manufactured “presidential immunity” similarly bars prosecution of Trump for actual crimes committed by him while in office, related in any way to his official duties. He doesn’t need an “immunity deal,” the Court gave it to him.