UNANIMITY NOT ALWAYS WHAT IT SEEMS | Four Big Cases Left This Term | Making A Murderer Might Make For A SCOTUS Case
June 20, 2018
DO YOU WANT THE 4-1-1
|CNN’s Joan Biskupic reports that this week’s unanimous ruling on partisan gerrymandering masks what’s really going on at the Supreme Court: deep division among justices on the issue. She notes that dueling opinions from CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS and JUSTICE ELENA KAGAN “revealed internal conflicts and portend difficulty ahead for any future gerrymandering claim.”
SHOOTING STRAIGHT
|“Let’s get one thing straight: When given the chance, both parties have drawn congressional and state legislative districts in a way that lets their side hold power. But lately, Republicans have been on the receiving end of judiciary blows to their congressional and state legislative maps across the country.” That’s Amber Phillips with The Washington Post noting that justices’ non-decision on partisan gerrymandering gave a big break to Republicans who might have had their GOP-drawn maps knocked down across the country. “Republicans controlled the pens in a majority of states where legislatures got to draw the districts after the 2010 Census. So Republicans would have been most vulnerable to such a game-changing decision by the Supreme Court about how districts can be drawn. Democrats were hoping to use the Wisconsin and Maryland models to sue Republicans in states like Ohio and Florida.”
ED BOARD OVERTURE
|The Editorial Board of the Los Angeles Times has something to say about the second Supreme Court victory for FANE LOZMAN, the Floridian who was arrested for speaking out at his local City Council meeting. The Ed Board explains the implications of the ruling and suggests, “This decision is significant in providing a check on local officials who might seek to use the police to silence their critics.”
MAKING A MURDERER MEETS SCOTUS
|The Associated Press reports that the case of the young man at the center of the Netflix series “Making a Murderer” will reach SCOTUS this week, as Thursday marks the justices’ first opportunity to discuss taking it up next term. Lawyers for BRENDAN DASSEY want his confession thrown out and for him to get a new trial. If justices decide they won’t hear the case, that news could come as early as Monday. If the court does agree to hear the case, arguments would be in the fall.
A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY
|Yesterday marked the anniversary of a 1988 Supreme Court decision in which the justices unanimously upheld a New York City law making it illegal for private clubs with more than 400 members to exclude women and minorities.
LEFTOVERS
|The Supreme Court has 14 decisions left to release in the next 10 days, with decisions expected tomorrow and Monday, June 25. Scott Bomboy with Constitution Daily aims our focus on four of those cases that are worth watching as the end of this term comes to a close.
SCOTUS VIEWS
The Best Way To Fix Gerrymandering Is To Make It Useless
The New York Times“Reformers could certainly try again next year, perhaps finding new approaches to avoid the shoals of standing. But a better approach would be to revamp the antiquated electoral institution that makes elaborate districting schemes both possible and so profitable in the first place — the single-member district. Increase the size of districts (and use ranked-choice voting to improve proportionality) and the predictability of results declines, making gerrymandering far less effective.”
The Fight To End Partisan Gerrymandering Is Far From Over
The Washington Post“Add one to the growing list of disappointments. The Supreme Court had the opportunity Monday to take a massive step toward more reasonable elections — and punted. The decisions postpone a national reckoning with the escalating pace of partisan warfare. But just because the court kicked the can of partisan gerrymandering down the road does not mean those who hope for change are at a loss. In fact, there are plenty of other opportunities for victory on the horizon.”
OTHER NEWS
Understanding Janus: 13 Ways The Pivotal Supreme Court Case Could Change The Finances, Membership & Politics Of Teachers Unions
The74“The case, like two others that have reached the high court in recent years, pits unions, who say mandatory fees are necessary to prevent ‘free riders’ from benefiting from union contracts, against dissenting members, who argue that being forced to pay dues violates their First Amendment rights. Janus once again raises the question of whether public employees must pay dues even if they disagree with their union’s political positions. The Janus decision is expected to be released over the next week — likely either this Thursday, the 21st, or next Monday, the 25th.”