{"id":33180,"date":"2017-05-22T13:58:52","date_gmt":"2017-05-22T17:58:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sidebarforplaintiffs.naomifein.net\/?p=33180"},"modified":"2017-05-22T13:58:52","modified_gmt":"2017-05-22T17:58:52","slug":"overjoyed-scotus-comes-up-big-5-3-on-voting-rights","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sidebarforplaintiffs.naomifein.net\/?p=33180","title":{"rendered":"Overjoyed: SCOTUS comes up big (5-3) on voting rights!!!"},"content":{"rendered":"

Source: Breaking and Analysis: Supreme Court on 5-3 Vote Affirms NC Racial Gerrymandering Case, with Thomas in Majority and Roberts in Dissent | Election Law Blog (Rich Hasen)<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

Just when I was thinking the only big news today would be that, after reading this in the New York Times<\/a>, I learned the method I was using to get rid of burnt pot residue was wrong.<\/p>\n

The above link–to Rich Hasen’s blog–tells you everything you need to know about this monumental and thrilling decision, including the big surprise that Clarence Thomas voted with the majority. (Not enough !!! to emphasis that.)<\/p>\n

Here’s Adam Liptak’s Times piece.<\/a><\/p>\n

And below, a comment about Judge Alito’s dissent which–considering the series I’ve just been running on worst Supreme Court decisions ever–tickles my dark, satirical sense of humor. Because, as I bolded (darkly)…<\/p>\n

Justice Alito, in his partial dissent for himself, the Chief Justice, and Justice Kennedy, is incensed at the decision, seeing it as inconsistent with the Court\u2019s earlier decision in\u00a0Easley v. Cromartie. He begins his dissent with: \u201c<\/strong>A precedent of this Court should not be treated like a disposable household item\u2014say, a paper plate or napkin\u2014to be used once and then tossed in the trash<\/strong>. But <\/span>that is what the Court does today in its decision regarding NorthCarolina\u2019s 12th Congressional District: The Court junks a rule adopted in a prior, remarkably similar challenge to this very same congressional district.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Geez, so what are we supposed to do with all those rotten Supreme Court decisions? Keep them vital because they are precedents?<\/p>\n

Alito’s bitterness demonstrates how far out in the surreal wilderness a Supreme Court justice can be. So let’s not revere these people. Let us mock them.<\/p>\n

Later. Today, let us stand up and cheer. As Rich Hasen writes:<\/p>\n

There is a lot of detail but here is my bottom line: This decision by Justice Kagan is a major victory for voting rights plaintiffs, who have succeeded in turning the racial gerrymandering cause of action into an effective tool to go after partisan gerrymanders in Southern states.<\/strong> That Justice Kagan got Justice Thomas not only to vote this way but to sign onto the opinion (giving it precedential value) is a really big deal.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Source: Breaking and Analysis: Supreme Court on 5-3 Vote Affirms NC Racial Gerrymandering Case, with Thomas in Majority and Roberts in Dissent | Election Law Blog (Rich Hasen) Just when I was thinking the only big news today would be … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1265],"tags":[1191,738,868,675],"class_list":["post-33180","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-voting-rights","tag-gerrymandering","tag-scotus","tag-supreme-court-of-the-united-states","tag-voting-rights"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t