Skip to main content

View Diary: If the President Had Done What SCOTUS Just Did with Partisan VRA Ruling (37 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  the previous case (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    (Northwest Austin Municipal v Holder) pretty much telegraphed Tuesday's decision and it basically said "If Congress does not fix the preclearance formula, we will strike it down the next time it comes before us because we've found, by our interpretation, serious constitutional problems with it." That was an 8-1 decision (Thomas dissenting, they also added the bail out feature which sadly Shelby County couldn't' bother to stick with).

    Congress did not fix it. Neither the House nor Senate bothered. The Senate sure is bothering now--hearings begin next month.

    SCOTUS has been upholding or overturning laws and parts of laws for 200+ years now as is its constitutional function, with some decisions (like the one that gave corporations personhood---that was 1886, or 1819 depending on what case you use and not 2010) using some ridiculous logic "made up out of thin air". That is still not illegal, nor is it impeachable, even if the dissenting opinions lambasted the majority opinions (which would not be the first time that's happened---did we miss Scalia's rather epic dissent on DOMA?). If you want that to change, you know the route you have to take to get there and it'd involve scrapping almost all of Article III and starting over.

    Conservatives HATED the Warren Court and wanted to have every one of them impeached for their legal opinions. Conservatives now HATE the DOMA decision and want to have every one of them impeached. I am not seeing how your petition is any different.

    •  Northwest Austin was full of shit too. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Roberts' argument relying on Northwest Austin is circular and disingenuous, basically saying "the preclearance map has issues because we said it did."  The "equal sovereignty" principle he cites does not exist outside of admitting States to the union.  This is explicit in South Carolina v. Katzenbach, one of the past rulings that allowed the VRA preclearance to proceed! It would be funny if it weren't insidious.

      Roberts is tossing aside precedent left and right to issue this ruling.  Shelby is a dumpster fire.  There is no real Constitutional issue with the preclearance map, but Roberts invented one to strike it down.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site