General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMoore v Harper SCOTUS arguments today, the case that could destroy our democracy
A few key excerpts
Link to tweet
....
Link to tweet
....
Link to tweet
True Blue American
(17,984 posts)Alito and Thomas doing most of the arguing. Neil Kartyal doing a great job.
LymphocyteLover
(5,643 posts)elleng
(130,865 posts)Alito, Thomas, and Katyal!
Cha
(297,154 posts)when we find out if we lose our Democracy or not?
I don't see how Democracy Loving Americans would stand for this without a Fight to Save our Democracy?
gab13by13
(21,304 posts)Just 3 hours of debate to decide the fate of our democracy. Once the states have unchecked power to run elections Magats won't have to worry about who won, they can pick their own electors regardless of the popular vote.
Bye bye checks and balances.
Thomas, Gorsuch, and Alito are locks to destroy democracy.
LymphocyteLover
(5,643 posts)Zeitghost
(3,858 posts)Without a public vote. It has always been that way.
The issue here is congressional elections.
gab13by13
(21,304 posts)It all depends on the final decision, but if the SC gives the states unchecked authority they will not stop with Congressional elections.
As far as states choosing electors for the Electoral college, this decision will give states the authority to disregard how the people voted for president, just what Trump and Eastman wanted.
Zeitghost
(3,858 posts)And constitutional. There is nothing in federal law or the constitution that requires a public vote to select electors. Each of the states has chosen to do so, but they could also choose not to.
Article II Section 1:
"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector."
Mysterian
(4,585 posts)it's time for the president to pack the court.
NYC Liberal
(20,135 posts)MarineCombatEngineer
(12,363 posts)that's the Senates job.
NYC Liberal
(20,135 posts)MarineCombatEngineer
(12,363 posts)it's the exclusive job of the Senate to confirm Fed. Judges.
NYC Liberal
(20,135 posts)That has to be passed by the House and the Senate.
MarineCombatEngineer
(12,363 posts)Also, you're right about nothing getting done as long as the repukes have the majority in the House.
gab13by13
(21,304 posts)Cha
(297,154 posts)in the Majority, who Treasure our Democracy, would stand for minority rule.?
Mad_Machine76
(24,406 posts)Last edited Wed Dec 7, 2022, 05:22 PM - Edit history (1)
Republicans should be careful what they wish for because they will freak TF out when the shoe is on the other foot. If Republicans don't want Democratic-controlled states changing the votes or subverting elections when they rightfully win, then they shouldn't want to exercise that same power in states they control too. And no matter what they do, they may not control all of the states they control now forever either.
Cha
(297,154 posts)let's hope the SC does the sane thing.
Fortunately, the Twitter read on the arguments (for what they're worth) is that Barrett and Kavanaugh may not be sold on the "theory". Not always the best predictor of the final vote but there may yet be hope. It sounds like there is a lot of confusion about what ISL theory even is
Cha
(297,154 posts)elleng
(130,865 posts)'Moore v. Harper should be an easy case. There is no coherent theory of constitutional interpretation under which the independent state legislature theory makes sense.'
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/moore-v-harper-heads-high-court?
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)explain legal issues to me any time, and I wish he would.
My best guess is that, if it's rejected, it'll be because of the blatant indefensibility of this particular attack on representative government, a desire of some justices to still be seen as respectable, not for lack of a coherent constitutional argument per se.
In It to Win It
(8,236 posts)Theres a lot wrong with that guy.
Mad_Machine76
(24,406 posts)don't they?! And our country is (and will be) worse for it.
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,130 posts)bdamomma
(63,836 posts)nt
Kaleva
(36,294 posts)Who they consider to be members of the Swamp, the Uniparty, the GOPe, or the Deep State..