Michael R. Ulrich

Barrett - can we just say we’re clarifying Gingles (foundational precedent on the VRA) instead of modifying it?

Trump admin lawyer- sure! You do you!!! As long as we’re making it impossible to enforce the VRA!

(You do have to modify Milligan in one way tho, he acknowledges .)

Kavanaugh is trying to articulate his concurrence. He's going to say that Section 2 isn't unconstitutional, just everything that Section 2 DOES is unconstitutional.

Gorsuch: we have computers now

Big if true

Not to be outdone, the Trump Solicitor General says you have to overturn Thornburg v Gingles, the 1982 precedent upon which all Section 2 claims are evaluated.

One of the most embarrassing opinions in recent Supreme Court history was Clarence Thomas insisting that when the post-slavery Congress protected “freedmen” they were protecting a “formally race-neutral category”

Lol. that was it. He was up for like 15 minutes of humiliation, and now he's gone.

Last up is Hashim Mooppan. Deputy SG for the Trump administration.

There's no real reason for the Trump admin to be here. But there's an opportunity for racism so I guess Trump wants to be involved.

Throwing all the bits and pieces of the worst discrimination jurisprudence never applied to voting rights at this - racial stereotyping (?); congruence & proportionality; has to be time-bound.

We have a Court that is game. Let’s try it!

Inside John Roberts’ Decades-Long Crusade Against the Voting Rights Act Roberts remains at the center of an impassioned debate about voting rights in America.

As a baby lawyer in the Reagan White House, John Roberts was writing memos arguing that violations of the Voting Rights Act should not be "too easy to prove." This is not just any legal issue that happens to come before him. This is his life's work. He just wants to finish what he started.

One of the Biggest Cases of the Supreme Court’s Term Is John Roberts’ Decadeslong Pet Project If there’s one thing the Roberts court has been consistent on, it’s this.

Everything about John Roberts's approach to the Voting Rights Act makes sense when you remember that John Roberts has has always been hostile to the Voting Rights Act, never believed it was appropriate, and has spent most of his 45-year legal career working to hollow it out.

The use of “stereotyping” is to imply that race-based remedies are actually racist, presumably suggesting there are Black people in Louisiana who would not want Black representatives in their government officials

Roberts and Alito skipped their chance to ask questions.

Sooo... what's basically happening is that the Republicans have decided to let the Democrats absolutely dog-walk Ed Greim so they can feel better about this case that they're going to lose.

Greim, meet bus, tell me how the wheels look.

Sotomayor: do bans on literacy tests to vote sunset as well?

Subtext: y’all wanna make everything old new again, right? How far are you willing to go?

The empty formalism used to constitutionally forbid diversity-enhancing or remedial action—that to “stop discriminating on the basis of race we must stop discriminating on the basis of race”—is possibly the most invidious trope the Roberts Court has cultivated in our modern legal culture.

Isn’t there a new Netflix show on this guy?

‼️ this was a striking moment, to me

Louisiana was basically like 'here come these Black people always asking for more' and Justice Jackson was like, 'that's not what the fuck they're asking for, they're saying: stop discriminating against us'

Justice Barrett really seems to want to say the congruence and proportionality test applies to VRA sec. 2. This is hardly obvious for a 15th Amendment statute, and I would say the existing blackletter law is that it's either rational basis or at most a kind of McCulloch reasonableness.

This may be a rare understatement from @elienyc.bsky.social

Kavanaugh must not have seen the news this morning while he was reminding himself in the mirror that the Constitution is neutral and answers no questions and that he’s a good boy that everyone loves

Kavanaugh has the most questions that start with or include some statement indicating everyone agrees on everything and loves everyone and he has nothing to do on the Court other than reminding everyone through binding decisions

a bald man in a suit and tie with a pocket square that says ' a ' on it ALT: a bald man in a suit and tie with a pocket square that says ' a ' on it

Kavanaugh: Justice Jackson said the goal is equality, and we all agree on that completely

Is that so???

Kagan: you’re relying on and using arguments used 2yrs ago in Milligan, problem being that we specifically rejected literally every single one of those arguments

Louisiana guy "If you look at the black population in Louisiana, they're all over the place."

Again, the fundamental argument for why Louisiana (which has 6 congressional districts and is 1/3 nonwhite) should over-represent white folks is because black folks are "too spread out."

The Louisiana argument is essentially that you CAN use race to be racist but you CAN'T use race to ameliorate racism.

Alito focusing on the limitations of prior decisions based in a preliminary injunction posture is hilarious given what is happening on the shadow docket and SCOTUS literally scolding lower courts for not properly considering unexplained shadow docket decisions

a woman is sitting on a couch and says " no more secrets no more hiding " ALT: a woman is sitting on a couch and says " no more secrets no more hiding "

Louisiana SG: we would never have written a map with a 2nd majority Black district if a court didn’t force us to

It must’ve felt nice to get that out in the open

Sotomayor: "race is *always* a part of redistricting efforts."

Thank you. See, the Republicans are trying to gaslight people by suggesting they're for "no race in gerrymandering." That's just not true. Race is ALWAYS a factor when you're drawing a map.

This is a key point and why following court experts is vital

Kagan: there’s a specific proven identifiable finding of a legal violation (vote dilution in violation of the voting rights act). How the fuck is that not a compelling interest for a remedy that ensures minority voters votes aren’t diluted?

Kagan distinguishing Shelby County: sec 2 is about conditions now, not about the past, and are proved in the courts as racial discrimination regardless of intent

Louisiana SG: even then you still can’t use race to fix the problem

a man is laughing with the words now that 's a good one above him ALT: a man is laughing with the words now that 's a good one above him

Louisiana SG: “This court’s dedication to fixing race-based discrimination…”

L.O.L.