Post

Raw Story
@rawstory.com

The New York Times editorial board tore into the Supreme Court's decision limiting the use of the Voting Rights Act to challenge racial gerrymanders on Wednesday, calling it "a mind-boggling piece of judicial overreach.

bit.lyNYT editorial board goes ballistic over Supreme Court's 'mind-boggling overreach'The New York Times editorial board tore into the Supreme Court's decision limiting the use of the Voting Rights Act to challenge racial gerrymanders on Wednesday, calling it "a mind-boggling piece of judicial overreach.""Six conservative justices voted to weaken the act, in that way substituting the...
Sanho Tree
@sanho.bsky.social

Is anyone going to mention that Justices Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barrett were all young lawyers on the Florida recount case in 2000 when George W. Bush stole the election? They should have recused themselves on all voter suppression & election stealing cases, but such cases are their raison d'etre.

Sanho Tree@sanho.bsky.social

A reminder George W. Bush “won” the Florida recount in 2000 (and hence the entire presidential election) by just 537 votes because of felony disenfranchisement laws (driven primarily by the racist drug war). Republicans conveniently overpurged Florida voter rolls right before the election.

Stacie Rosenzweig
@ethicking.com

I don’t think judges/justices should have to recuse because they worked on a case in the same field in the past (by that logic, I couldn’t be on election cases either if I were a judge), but none of these people should’ve made it to the court in the first place

0 reposts1 like

No replies yet.