51
Supreme Court rejects theory that would have meant radical changes to election rules
(www.washingtonpost.com)
this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2023
51 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10178 readers
348 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This session has really been sort of surprising when compared with last session. The 6-3 Republican majority last year really kicked the hornet's nest, between the NY gun case and Dobbs. It seemed like now that the Court was firmly in the hands of ideologues they were just going to go YOLO and tick off every item on the right-wing wish list.
I have no way of substantiating this, but I have to wonder if the outrage that has arisen nationwide in the wake of Dobbs, along with all of the coverage of the various justices' ethical lapses, is having a similar effect as FDR's court-packing scheme had on the Court of the 1930s. His plan to add sympathetic justices to the Court to stop the string of right-wing blows against the New Deal failed, but it was a credible enough threat that it caused at least one justice to stop obstructing and allowed FDR's programs to get through unimpeded.
Could it be that the majority is so uncomfortable with the heat it's gotten the past year that they're throwing cold water on their grander ambitions? If so, let's keep up the pressure!
I don't know about "the majority", but I'm pretty sure Roberts has been twisting arms so that his legacy isn't being the chief justice who presided over the downfall of the court.
Entirely possible, though it seems like he was twisting arms the last session to get his colleagues to slow down, and we all saw how that turned out. Something has shifted, and I'm not really sure what, but while the Court as a whole is decidedly right-wing, it's more chastened than the triumphalist 2021-22 session.
I have a suspicion that the court would have left Roe at least partially intact if the draft memo hadn't leaked.