The Supreme Court’s Quiet Campaign Against Voting Rights | NY Pandemic Restrictions To Face SCOTUS Test
November 23, 2020
A RECURRING TREND
|Robert Barnes with The Washington Post reports on the Supreme Court’s continued trend of allowing federal executions to go forward. JUSTICE AMY BARRETT participated in her first capital punishment case on the court last week when justices lifted a stay of execution — an action that resulted in Orlando Hall to be put to death by lethal injection about an hour after SCOTUS weighed in. Barnes writes, “Barrett probably was in the majority that allowed the execution to proceed, although some qualification is needed. In emergency applications, the court often does not explain its reasoning, nor does it provide a breakdown of the vote.”
SORRY PASS
|SCOTUS today declined to revive a case brought against the University of New Mexico by a formal medical student who was disciplined for a rant made on Facebook. Mike Leonard with Bloomberg Law reviews the First Amendment claims and the Supreme Court’s decision to stay out of it.
NOT GIVING IN
|The Trump campaign is still fighting in court hoping to overturn the results of the presidential election. Over the weekend, the campaign gave notice to appeal the dismissal of a federal lawsuit that aimed to block Pennsylvania from certifying its election results. Trump’s attorney RUDY GIULIANI has already said he wants the case to go to SCOTUS but, as Erik Larson with Bloomberg reports, it’s unlikely to stop the state from certifying PRESIDENT-ELECT JOE BIDEN’S victory in the state.
TOP-ED
|“In the end, the blizzard of lawsuits from PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP’S campaign will amount to nothing beyond a megaphone for disinformation about the integrity of the 2020 election. As destructive as the president’s attempts to undermine democracy are, the most lasting damage to America’s election system is likely to come instead from a series of Supreme Court rulings that appear perfunctory but actually could restrict voters’ rights for years to come.” That’s Wendy Weiser and Daniel Weiner writing in POLITICO Magazine about the justices “quietly—yet dramatically” rolling back voting rights “in ways that could do permanent harm—that is, unless Congress steps in.”
SCOTUS VIEWS
Nationwide Injunctions Will Be A Vital Check If Biden Overreaches
The Wall Street Journal“Federal district judges have frustrated the Trump administration by issuing nationwide injunctions against dozens of agency actions. The Supreme Court will consider a case this term that could determine when, if ever, judges can issue these universal injunctions, which apply beyond the geographic limits of the court’s jurisdiction. At the same time, with Republicans expected to control the Senate next year, President-elect Biden plans executive actions to bypass Congress and decree sweeping regulatory changes affecting nearly every U.S. industry. For the next four years, conservatives will be apt to seek nationwide injunctions—and courts should continue issuing them as a vital check on executive-branch overreach.”
OTHER NEWS
Cuomo’s Pandemic Powers Might Be Tested In Supreme Court Case
The Wall Street Journal“Since New York’s first novel coronavirus case in March, Gov. Andrew Cuomo has issued executive orders closing offices and restaurants, schools and fitness centers. And courts have backed him up almost every time…The U.S. Supreme Court is expected this week to say whether it will hear a challenge by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn to the restrictions that Mr. Cuomo placed on parts of the borough in October.”