What's up, nerds! @AngryBlackLady here ready to live-tweet the downfall of democracy in #MooreVHarper!
The independent state legislature theory (ISL Theory) is on deck. And it's bad.
The independent state legislature theory (ISL Theory) is on deck. And it's bad.
https://twitter.com/RewireNewsGroup/status/1600143046464753669?s=20&t=kOJbeRkbOhyxHlytqHxiEw
THE ISL theory posits that state courts are without power to review state legislative action when it comes to federal elections because the Elections Clause says the legislature *exclusively* has the power to set the time, place, and manner of federal elections.
It's absurd.
It's absurd.
It's contrary to the Constitution. It's contrary to originalism, which Thomas and Alito love to dry hump when it suits them.
And it's contrary to common friggin sense.
But common sense and the rule of law don't matter anymore so here we are.
And it's contrary to common friggin sense.
But common sense and the rule of law don't matter anymore so here we are.
It cannot be that the Supreme Court now has to get into the business of interpreting and ruling on state laws and state constitutions related to federal elections. It's completely bananas.
They're talking about Smiley v. Holm, which is precedent (not that it matters.)
In Smiley v. Holm the Court directly addressed whether the Elections Clause allows a state legislature to enact laws that don't comport with the state constitution and said no... unanimously.
In Smiley v. Holm the Court directly addressed whether the Elections Clause allows a state legislature to enact laws that don't comport with the state constitution and said no... unanimously.
North Carolina atty is now talking about one of the ISL theories they're positing. Even if NC state leg is beholden to the constitution, then state courts can only enforce procedural rules as opposed to substantive ones.
ACB wants to know what's the difference.
ACB wants to know what's the difference.
Jackson: Why is "what counts as the legislature" not a creature of state constitutional law?
State legislative authority comes from the constitution, right? So when state courts are reviewing actions of the legislature why isn't that just its function and power?
GOOD QUESTION.
State legislative authority comes from the constitution, right? So when state courts are reviewing actions of the legislature why isn't that just its function and power?
GOOD QUESTION.
Sotomayor: Elections Clause says the legislature in each state shall proscribe the time, place, and manner of elections.
State constitutions have regulated time, place, and manner since the beginning. If there's no substantive limitation in the Elec. Cl., how can we read one in?
State constitutions have regulated time, place, and manner since the beginning. If there's no substantive limitation in the Elec. Cl., how can we read one in?
She's making a textualist argument and then points to the 10th amendment which reserves to the states powers not delegated to the federal government.
Republicans LOVE states' rights... but not here, apparently.
Sotomayor just accused NC atty of rewriting history.
Amazing.
Republicans LOVE states' rights... but not here, apparently.
Sotomayor just accused NC atty of rewriting history.
Amazing.
I love that the attorney for North Carolina is dry humping the Framers but ignoring what they said and what they believed about how state constitutions and legislatures operate within the Constitution.
The Elections Clause’s reference to legislatures re- affirmed—and did not abrogate—the founding-era understanding of a legislature as a lawmaking body CONSTRAINED BY THE CONSTITUTION THAT CREATWD IT.
But sure, keep taking about Samuel Johnson and James Madison and cherrypicking.
But sure, keep taking about Samuel Johnson and James Madison and cherrypicking.
Current Mood:
Kagan: The courts and the constitution constrain the legislature. The governor also constrains the leg with the power of veto.
Legislature subject to the ordinary set of constraints.
Smiley case said we take that system as we find it. We take the constraints as we find them.
Legislature subject to the ordinary set of constraints.
Smiley case said we take that system as we find it. We take the constraints as we find them.
Kagan: Our precedents give you a lot of problems.
Now she's just listing off precedents.
Unfortunately, this court doesn't give a cinnamon toast fuck about precedents—AND I NEED PROGRESSIVE LEGAL SCHOLARS TO RECOGNIZE THIS AND PROCEED ACCORDINGLY.
Now she's just listing off precedents.
Unfortunately, this court doesn't give a cinnamon toast fuck about precedents—AND I NEED PROGRESSIVE LEGAL SCHOLARS TO RECOGNIZE THIS AND PROCEED ACCORDINGLY.
And in 2019 in Rucho v. Common Cause, the Supreme Court said "well federal courts can't get involved in partisan gerrymandering, but don't worry—STATE COURTS STILL CAN."
Now the Court is about to go back on that precedent.
Now the Court is about to go back on that precedent.
So federal courts can't prevent partisan gerrymandering. And now neither can state courts.
That's frigging great.
That's frigging great.
Kagan just said that North Carolina's argument makes little sense.
LOL.
These women are OVER IT.
And quite frankly, I'm no fan of ACB, but at least her questions are INTELLIGENT.
Unlike credible rapist Justice Kegstand who's basically got his thumb up his own ass.
LOL.
These women are OVER IT.
And quite frankly, I'm no fan of ACB, but at least her questions are INTELLIGENT.
Unlike credible rapist Justice Kegstand who's basically got his thumb up his own ass.
I love spicy Kagan
https://twitter.com/ProfSugarman/status/1600514419188027395?s=20&t=Yt6-qz-WTaIBGPn5TgD8Ng
It's so critical to recognize that Bush v. Gore was supposed to be a one off.
But here we are.
But here we are.
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1600516715145793537
Kagan: Your proposal gets rid of checks and balances at exactly the time when they are needed most.
legislators have their own self-interest. They want to get reelected. They have incentives to suppress, dilute and negate votes to prevent voters from having access.
BOO-YA
legislators have their own self-interest. They want to get reelected. They have incentives to suppress, dilute and negate votes to prevent voters from having access.
BOO-YA
oh wait, that was Sotomayor.
Foiled again!
Foiled again!
I broke the thread accidentally. It continues here.
https://twitter.com/RewireNewsGroup/status/1600515218219888640?s=20&t=Yt6-qz-WTaIBGPn5TgD8Ng
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
