SCOTUS COULD STOP “FAITHLESS ELECTORS” AS 2020 LOOMS | The One Voice Missing During Last Week’s LGBTQ Arguments
October 14, 2019
ROGUE TEN
|“On Dec. 19, 2016, a little more than a month after the presidential election, members of the Electoral College gathered around the nation to cast their votes. Ten of them went rogue.” Adam Liptak with The New York Times covers a petition filed with The Supreme Court last week asking justices to decide whether these so-called “faithless electors” were free to disregard pledges they made to vote for their own parties’ candidates.
DULY NOTED
|Jess Bravin with The Wall Street Journal reports on the SCOTUSNotes project which is digitizing and transcribing the notes of former Supreme Court justices so that they can be accessed online for the public. These notes were taken by the justices themselves from meetings and discussions that led to some of the most consequential decisions in our nation’s history.
TOP-ED
|“Despite the significant power it wields, the Supreme Court is among the federal government’s most undemocratic institutions. Its justices are appointed for life terms, and selected and confirmed by presidents and the Senate — which themselves do not necessarily reflect the will of the public.” That’s Leah Litman arguing in The Washington Post that the Supreme Court could get a lot more undemocratic by the end of this term.
SCOTUS VIEWS
What If The Supreme Court Had An L.G.B.T. Justice?
The New York Times“For two hours, the justices and the lawyers for both sides debated everything from the meaning of the word ‘sex’ to the nature of congressional intent to the wisdom of sex-segregated bathrooms. I couldn’t help noticing what was missing: the voice, and the perspective, of an openly L.G.B.T. justice. Instead, nine straight people were deciding whether to afford some of the most basic measures of equality to people who identify as gay or transgender and who make up roughly 5 percent of the United States population, according to a Gallup estimate.”
What Would Happen If Trump Ignored A Divided Supreme Court Ruling Against Him?
The Washington Post“It looks increasingly likely that the Supreme Court will eventually be asked to resolve at least one of the many disputes in which President Trump has either ordered current or former officials to refuse to comply with congressional subpoenas or in which he is seeking to bar a third party from voluntarily complying. Not only did the White House signal last Tuesday that it will no longer cooperate with any congressional requests, but the federal appeals court in Washington ruled Friday morning that the president could not block an accounting firm from turning over records of the work it has performed on Trump’s behalf — the first appellate ruling in one of these cases, setting the stage for a further appeal to the high court.”
OTHER NEWS
Heads Up: A Ruling On The Latest Challenge To The Affordable Care Act Is Coming
NPR“A decision in the latest court case to threaten the future of the Affordable Care Act could come as soon as this month. The ruling will come from the panel of judges in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which heard oral arguments in the Texas v. Azar lawsuit. An estimated 24 million people get their health coverage through programs created under the law, which has faced countless court challenges since it passed.”