Hey, Marc, Tom Lee from Nashville—the TN Gen’l Assembly is back in special session Tuesday, presumably to remap TN-9. Qualifying deadlines for our August congressional primaries passed in early March. As a matter of law: Important, or minor inconvenience?
Hooray! Norm Ornstein also are on this today. AT LAST people of weight are saying: Use the Constitution! The Supreme Court's reckless over-reach destroys legitimate democratic norms by expanding court review recklessly. Congress can curb the Court. Just give us the majority to pass and re-pass democratic legislation governing elections, and exclude Court appellate review! Thank you Norm & Steve. Lets get 21st-century oriented Democrats behind this effort and in 8 months the new Congress can save our electoral democracy.
With Congress made up of Zombies, and SCOTUS in dumpy's pocket, what chance do we have at getting our Democracy back? Even voting has been substantially corrupted with software interference. Needing some rays of hope :) Also - is there any part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that is still alive and well?
Hi Marc. Dan Leonard from Armonk New York. I’m intrigued by the possibility that the Supreme Court’s ruling on congressional districts will show energize Democrats that even if it has a neutralizing effect on the house, it may push Senate races over the line into Democrat territory. What do you think?
1) Is there any legitimate effort ongoing to author some kind of redemocratization bill that will contain the constitutional amendments and legislative changes needed to bulletproof or at least fortify our democracy from authoritarian takeover in the future? It seems such an effort, if the democrats are given the chance, will need to be swift and well-thought out from "day one". We all know what the Founders intended, but it seems the our laws and Constitution has been a gentlemen's agreement without teeth. I hope you can be involved in those parts that will better and more clearly protect voters.
2) What would an "independent" panel look like to fairly draw districts? How to keep such a panel from being politicized? Who decides who is on the panel? What information and experience would they use to decide which voters a district ought to include? Are voter groups very generalized or surgically detailed? Good task for AI? It would seem impossible to keep the process balanced and fair, yet easy to rig and corrupt.
If the gerrymanders in TN, Fl, Il take place, can a high vote turnout really beat the gerrymander? And if it can, what would the turn out need to be? 70% like Hungary or higher? The voter turnout in the US is typically in the 40-50%.
Oh, that will be a fabulous discussion. I have plans out for the timeframe you mention, but I will check in afterward to catch the pearls. Thank you Joyce, as usual.
I want to make a statement that I trust does not elicit anyone asking whether I am crazy or just stupid. The VRA, vitally needed when it was passed in the 60s (and still considered necessary by our Civil Rights Organizations and many Americans) is simply outdated to cover ALL behaviors that might explain how "racially discriminatory behavior" employed by individuals OR any governmental entities may now be fairly legally interpreted.
I may disapprove the current holdings of this SCOTUS (and I do), but I understand why the Republicans are playing this card for political advantage. It is their last stand before the younger generations take over. Greater legal minds than mine may debate the logic and decency of the Supreme Court having gutted the heart of the VRA, especially at such a pivotal time our nation's history. I do not think it requires a legal scholar, however, to see clearly that future federal legislation to end all racial discrimination in the U.S. will not permit the advantaging of any one race/gender/ethnic identity over another. What seems like a pie-in-the-sky holding that will hurt us in the 2026 and 2028 elections need not be mortal to our cause. It is what SCOTUS left us with the other day and what we must deal with now. It is not coincidence that the dissenting Justices were three women, with two of color. Acceptance that racial disadvantage or bias exists in our culture to represent sufficient legal inequity to support the VRA in its current form would require life experience that is simply not in the DNA of the majority of our existing Supreme Court conservative members. So, no surprise to me.
I have faith that Marc Elias and others will do their very best to stop illegal voting measures attempted by various governmental entities in real time on State and local levels. The recent Supreme Court decision will eventually require a revised national legal definition on what "racial/gender/ethnic injustice" truly looks like, one that all Americans will understand and one where all Americans may receive the extended benefits from. Then, legislation (or an Amendment if needed to bolster the 14th) can be drafted that will always be SCOTUS affirming. That challenge is not ours for this day, however. For now let us do what we can and must. Let us make certain that the mechanics of everyone's voting rights, still in tact - which must accrue to every voter everywhere (without concern for race) - be meticulously followed, even if the districts themselves are gerrymandered prior the 2026 and 2028 elections. Then, it will be up to turnout. I know Americans at large are committed to protecting our Democracy. Our challenge is primarily effecting an education process for our voters in advance. This we can do; the time exists. The tools to protect individual voter rights (if not a specific "class of voter") exist now and can make the positive difference to the outcomes IF the voter is informed and insistent enough to demand his/her rights in real time when he/she registers and votes. Let's go!
We learn a lot of law "stuff" from you two and a heartfelt thank you for that! There's chatter (again) about expanding SCOTUS to fit the number of circuits (13?). Is this feasible? What are the pros and cons, from a legal point of view?
Am I missing something? It seems to me that the SCOTUS decision last week says racial gerrymandering is illegal, BUT partisan gerrymandering is allowed. Do I have that right? It definitely does not seem right and the result is every Southern state is hustling to do their best with a partisan gerrymandering effort, even to the point of declaring an emergency (in Louisiana) and stopping an election already in progress. When will this lunacy stop?
Can an AI-assisted GIS program create a way to delineate electoral districts without running afoul of the restrictions SCOTUS has created in the Callais decision?
We are in Albania where there are horrible stories from the dictatorship. We visited the Bunkart2 which revealed so much of life under a dictator. Here is a quote which struck my heart. “If the dictators had the certainty that their evil deeds will remembered forever, maybe would be accomplishing less horrors”
Know you are covering most of what’s important … All of Everything
Thank you Joyce ✨🌺
Hey, Marc, Tom Lee from Nashville—the TN Gen’l Assembly is back in special session Tuesday, presumably to remap TN-9. Qualifying deadlines for our August congressional primaries passed in early March. As a matter of law: Important, or minor inconvenience?
What can we, the people, do about corruption in the Supreme Court that includes Chief Justice Roberts?
Hooray! Norm Ornstein also are on this today. AT LAST people of weight are saying: Use the Constitution! The Supreme Court's reckless over-reach destroys legitimate democratic norms by expanding court review recklessly. Congress can curb the Court. Just give us the majority to pass and re-pass democratic legislation governing elections, and exclude Court appellate review! Thank you Norm & Steve. Lets get 21st-century oriented Democrats behind this effort and in 8 months the new Congress can save our electoral democracy.
With Congress made up of Zombies, and SCOTUS in dumpy's pocket, what chance do we have at getting our Democracy back? Even voting has been substantially corrupted with software interference. Needing some rays of hope :) Also - is there any part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that is still alive and well?
Hi Marc. Dan Leonard from Armonk New York. I’m intrigued by the possibility that the Supreme Court’s ruling on congressional districts will show energize Democrats that even if it has a neutralizing effect on the house, it may push Senate races over the line into Democrat territory. What do you think?
Mark Elias is formidable! Looking forward to listening in.
Looking forward to it!
1) Is there any legitimate effort ongoing to author some kind of redemocratization bill that will contain the constitutional amendments and legislative changes needed to bulletproof or at least fortify our democracy from authoritarian takeover in the future? It seems such an effort, if the democrats are given the chance, will need to be swift and well-thought out from "day one". We all know what the Founders intended, but it seems the our laws and Constitution has been a gentlemen's agreement without teeth. I hope you can be involved in those parts that will better and more clearly protect voters.
2) What would an "independent" panel look like to fairly draw districts? How to keep such a panel from being politicized? Who decides who is on the panel? What information and experience would they use to decide which voters a district ought to include? Are voter groups very generalized or surgically detailed? Good task for AI? It would seem impossible to keep the process balanced and fair, yet easy to rig and corrupt.
Hi. Louise from White Plains.
Could you please devote a bit of time to Justice Lewis Powell's 1971 "secret memo" which was the starting gun for all the misery we are suffering now?
If the gerrymanders in TN, Fl, Il take place, can a high vote turnout really beat the gerrymander? And if it can, what would the turn out need to be? 70% like Hungary or higher? The voter turnout in the US is typically in the 40-50%.
I read that the total US gerrymander as a result of Callais is likely to yield to the GOP 19 House districts.
Oh, that will be a fabulous discussion. I have plans out for the timeframe you mention, but I will check in afterward to catch the pearls. Thank you Joyce, as usual.
I want to make a statement that I trust does not elicit anyone asking whether I am crazy or just stupid. The VRA, vitally needed when it was passed in the 60s (and still considered necessary by our Civil Rights Organizations and many Americans) is simply outdated to cover ALL behaviors that might explain how "racially discriminatory behavior" employed by individuals OR any governmental entities may now be fairly legally interpreted.
I may disapprove the current holdings of this SCOTUS (and I do), but I understand why the Republicans are playing this card for political advantage. It is their last stand before the younger generations take over. Greater legal minds than mine may debate the logic and decency of the Supreme Court having gutted the heart of the VRA, especially at such a pivotal time our nation's history. I do not think it requires a legal scholar, however, to see clearly that future federal legislation to end all racial discrimination in the U.S. will not permit the advantaging of any one race/gender/ethnic identity over another. What seems like a pie-in-the-sky holding that will hurt us in the 2026 and 2028 elections need not be mortal to our cause. It is what SCOTUS left us with the other day and what we must deal with now. It is not coincidence that the dissenting Justices were three women, with two of color. Acceptance that racial disadvantage or bias exists in our culture to represent sufficient legal inequity to support the VRA in its current form would require life experience that is simply not in the DNA of the majority of our existing Supreme Court conservative members. So, no surprise to me.
I have faith that Marc Elias and others will do their very best to stop illegal voting measures attempted by various governmental entities in real time on State and local levels. The recent Supreme Court decision will eventually require a revised national legal definition on what "racial/gender/ethnic injustice" truly looks like, one that all Americans will understand and one where all Americans may receive the extended benefits from. Then, legislation (or an Amendment if needed to bolster the 14th) can be drafted that will always be SCOTUS affirming. That challenge is not ours for this day, however. For now let us do what we can and must. Let us make certain that the mechanics of everyone's voting rights, still in tact - which must accrue to every voter everywhere (without concern for race) - be meticulously followed, even if the districts themselves are gerrymandered prior the 2026 and 2028 elections. Then, it will be up to turnout. I know Americans at large are committed to protecting our Democracy. Our challenge is primarily effecting an education process for our voters in advance. This we can do; the time exists. The tools to protect individual voter rights (if not a specific "class of voter") exist now and can make the positive difference to the outcomes IF the voter is informed and insistent enough to demand his/her rights in real time when he/she registers and votes. Let's go!
Richard from Virginia here:
We learn a lot of law "stuff" from you two and a heartfelt thank you for that! There's chatter (again) about expanding SCOTUS to fit the number of circuits (13?). Is this feasible? What are the pros and cons, from a legal point of view?
Am I missing something? It seems to me that the SCOTUS decision last week says racial gerrymandering is illegal, BUT partisan gerrymandering is allowed. Do I have that right? It definitely does not seem right and the result is every Southern state is hustling to do their best with a partisan gerrymandering effort, even to the point of declaring an emergency (in Louisiana) and stopping an election already in progress. When will this lunacy stop?
Can an AI-assisted GIS program create a way to delineate electoral districts without running afoul of the restrictions SCOTUS has created in the Callais decision?
We are in Albania where there are horrible stories from the dictatorship. We visited the Bunkart2 which revealed so much of life under a dictator. Here is a quote which struck my heart. “If the dictators had the certainty that their evil deeds will remembered forever, maybe would be accomplishing less horrors”