Anything relating to state and federal courts, court reform, SCOTUS, etc.
The Texas Supreme Court has rejected an effort by GOP officials to expel Democratic lawmakers who briefly fled the state last summer in an attempt to prevent Republicans from passing a partisan gerrymander.
At the heart of these cases is the Purcell principle — the idea that courts should avoid changing voting or election rules too close to an election.
Sen. Booker stopped short of saying he would support expanding the number of SCOTUS justices, but doubled-down on saying the court is corrupt.
The Guardian found that Justice Samuel Alito used “misleading” data in determining that Black and white voter turnout rates have reached parity.
Black voters are pressing SCOTUS to apply the Purcell principle of law, which says voting rules and maps shouldn’t be changed too close to an election.
It’s no exaggeration to say this was among the worst weeks for voting rights in our history.
In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court gutting the Voting Rights Act, another set of laws is also in danger: state-level statutes that seek to bar racially discriminatory voting practices.
After the Supreme Court’s six Republican-appointed justices gutted the Voting Rights Act, Democrats across the country said they will respond with their own redistricting efforts and, eventually, new pro-voting laws.
The legal cases are primarily concentrated in the South, where America’s legacy of racial discrimination still casts the longest shadow over voting rights.
Following the Supreme Court’s gutting of the Voting Rights Act Wednesday, legal scholars and advocates across the country demanded reforms to the Supreme Court to preserve free and fair elections and voting rights in the U.S.