Gorsuch was good on ICWA. He's crap on everything else.
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1600519842246926340
the original public meaning of the Constitution changes and shifts depending upon what Republicans want. It's so disingenuous.
https://twitter.com/AudreLawdAMercy/status/1600521157937168384?s=20&t=1J9FBuQRjxk9Wye9hN_lVQ
Jackson: The Elections Clause doesn't take any position as to who the entity in the state is that qualifies as the legislature.
It's the state's constitution that tells us who the legislature is and whether what they're doing is a valid exercise of leg authority...
It's the state's constitution that tells us who the legislature is and whether what they're doing is a valid exercise of leg authority...
Jackson cont'd:
So then why don't constitutional limits on the exercise of that entity on its power still apply?
They do! It makes no sense that the "legislature" whatever it is, can do what it wants unconstrained by the state constitution with respect to federal elections.
So then why don't constitutional limits on the exercise of that entity on its power still apply?
They do! It makes no sense that the "legislature" whatever it is, can do what it wants unconstrained by the state constitution with respect to federal elections.
Neal Katyal is up:
"Everything that guy just said is bullshit." Essentially.
"Everything that guy just said is bullshit." Essentially.
Katyal: Petitioners claim the word legislature means a species of state law that has never existed.
State law making unconstrained by a state constitution is bonkers.
If the founders intended to do that, someone would have said something. LOL.
Katyal is not messing around.
State law making unconstrained by a state constitution is bonkers.
If the founders intended to do that, someone would have said something. LOL.
Katyal is not messing around.
Oooooh Katyal is hitting Thomas right in his originalist nads.
Katyal says he's been waiting for 20 years to argue this case before Thomas because it is right in Thomas's "I heart originalism" bailiwick.
That was a dig. Love it.
Katyal says he's been waiting for 20 years to argue this case before Thomas because it is right in Thomas's "I heart originalism" bailiwick.
That was a dig. Love it.
I appreciate Neal Katyal not interrupting the women justices the way the NC attorney did.
Katyal really hammering the Smiley case which again said:
a congressional redistricting plan passed by the state leg but vetoed by the governor was invalid under the state constitution and “cannot be sustained by virtue of any authority conferred by the Federal Constitution.”
a congressional redistricting plan passed by the state leg but vetoed by the governor was invalid under the state constitution and “cannot be sustained by virtue of any authority conferred by the Federal Constitution.”
This was such a great moment. Katyal is very good. Very organized argument unlike the ding dong who reps NC.
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1600524330957524994
Katyal: This court has NEVER second guessed a state interpretation of its own constitution.
Alito: That's not true.
Katyal: Yes it is.
Alito: We've invalidated state statutes.
Katyal: But not state constitutional provisions. It's not your damn business. (paraphrasing)
Alito: That's not true.
Katyal: Yes it is.
Alito: We've invalidated state statutes.
Katyal: But not state constitutional provisions. It's not your damn business. (paraphrasing)
Think about what it would mean if federal courts had to start parsing state constitutional provisions regarding federal elections.
IT WOULD OPEN UP A LITIGATION TSUNAMI.
The federal courts would have to get into the business of parsing state constitutions. That's not their job.
IT WOULD OPEN UP A LITIGATION TSUNAMI.
The federal courts would have to get into the business of parsing state constitutions. That's not their job.
It's all up to ACB apparently. And that's worrying.
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1600522245633441795
Siding with any version of the ISL theory leads to absolute chaos.
The provisions NC argues is concrete and can be reviewed by state courts—like polls must close at 8 pm—aren't necessarily concrete. What if there's a hurricane? So then fed courts have to get involved?
Madness.
The provisions NC argues is concrete and can be reviewed by state courts—like polls must close at 8 pm—aren't necessarily concrete. What if there's a hurricane? So then fed courts have to get involved?
Madness.
What the fuck is Gorsuch's problem?
Gorsuch asking Katyal about the 3/5ths Clause in a 19th century ruling in a case in antebellum Virginia.
Gorsuch cont'd: He asks about Virginia adopting the 3/5s provision into its constitution and whether that is consistent with the elections clause.
He's trying to play gotcha using Black trauma. Just like Alito and Black Santa.
He's trying to play gotcha using Black trauma. Just like Alito and Black Santa.
Katyal says the Virginia decision was consistent with the Elections Clause so Gorsuch accuses him of defending the 3/5 clause.
Katyal says "uh no."
... the fuck.
Katyal says "uh no."
... the fuck.
THIS BIT LITERALLY BLOWS MY MIND.
I nearly lost it when I read this in the brief.
I nearly lost it when I read this in the brief.
https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/1600523171828043776?s=20&t=IL3YGsGyb-Qnxm7mHWjQQg
Alito does orginalism when it suits his Fed Soc masters. Just no intellectual honestly whatsoever. He's a corrupt partisan hack. Probably will leak this opinion to whomever too
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1600540631470047233
Now Prelogar is up for the DOJ. She's always good.
"Their theory is bullshit. It doesn't comport with the Founders. It would sow chaos. Stop acting like jackasses."
me, paraphrasing Prelogar.
me, paraphrasing Prelogar.
Thomas says it's ironic that she's on the other side of a federalism issue. (Because she reps the government har har.)
But is it?
no more ironic than your wife being an insurrectionist and advocating for the very theory that is being debated before you this morning, CLARENCE.
But is it?
no more ironic than your wife being an insurrectionist and advocating for the very theory that is being debated before you this morning, CLARENCE.
It is fundamentally bonkers to argue that the state constitution does not constrain the state legislature on matters of voting in federal elections.
IT'S CUCKOO BANANAS.
IT'S CUCKOO BANANAS.
This has been @AngryBlackLady live-tweeting oral arguments in #MooreVHarper.
If your head is still spinning, don't worry—@Hegemommy and I are going LIVE on YouTube at 2 PM EST for a rapid reaction episode of #BoomLawyered. Join us here:
If your head is still spinning, don't worry—@Hegemommy and I are going LIVE on YouTube at 2 PM EST for a rapid reaction episode of #BoomLawyered. Join us here:
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
