How Did the Supreme Court Give a Green Light to Massive Voter Suppression? Two words: Neil Gorsuch.

[Exotica]

https://www.thenation.com/article/supreme-court-give-green-light-massive-voter-suppression/

When Neil Gorsuch appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2017 to make a case for his confirmation to serve a life term on the US Supreme Court, Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy observed that, “unless we were asking about fishing or basketball, Judge Gorsuch stonewalled and avoided any substantive response. He was excruciatingly evasive. His sworn testimony and his approach to complying with this Committee’s historic role in the confirmation process have been patronizing. That is a disservice to the American people. And it is a blight on this confirmation process.”

Leahy said the nominee’s evasiveness was a particular concern on the voting-rights issues that were raised during the hearing. Gorsuch, said the chamber’s senior senator, “provided no answer at all to questions regarding the Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby County to gut the Voting Rights Act.” The same went for questions from Leahy and a his fellow senators regarding democracy issues. The questions were asked, but Gorsuch did not answer.

Now Justice Gorsuch has answered. On Monday, the Court released its ruling in the case of Hustad v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, an essential test of the Court’s stance regarding voting rights. With the critical 2018 election just months away, the Court’s activist majority gave Republican secretaries of state a go-ahead to resume the antidemocratic practice of purging fully qualified voters from registration rolls.

It was a 5-4 decision. Had Judge Merrick Garland, who was nominated by President Obama to serve on the Court but was then refused a confirmation hearing as part of the machinations by Senate Republican that eventually landed Gorsuch on the high court, it almost certainly would have been different. There is good reason to believe that a Justice Garland would have refused to send the signal that Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law president Kristen Clarke warns is likely to be interpreted “as a green light to purge the registration rolls of legitimately registered voters.”

snip

[BigmanPigman]

1. Two more words...Mitch McCknnell.

Oh, and two more...Fuck you!

[BeyondGeography]

2. That's what happens when you lose elections

And yeah, it’s awful.

[unblock]

3. We won in 2012.

Yeah, republicans had the senate, so I guess you could say that's what happens when you don't win the senate too, but it's a first.

Used to be the president got to nominate and there was a reasonable negotiation of sorts with the senate.

Mcturtle changed that. Now the norm is that the senate has the ultimate power and there need be no deference to the president, at least when it's a president from a different party.

[BeyondGeography]

4. Garland replaces Scalia if HRC wins

And even if McTurtle went full kamikaze for four years 5-4 votes like this would have been a push.

[unblock]

6. Says who?

There's no reason to believe mcturtle wouldn't have continued to stonewall. He denied a seat to obama, he could deny a seat to Hillary.

The court might have been 4-4 until the same party had both the senate and the presidency. That's the norm mcturtle created

[BeyondGeography]

7. Let's try again...We lost this case because HRC lost the election

[unblock]

9. let's split the difference -- we lost part 2 of the supreme court seat heist in 2016.

part 1 we lost because of mcturtle keeping the seat open, effectively denying obama his right to nominate someone to the court, and part 1 would have continued until we won the senate (garland gets the seat) or as it happened, with donnie stealing the election in 2016 and gorsuch got the seat.

[beachbum bob]

5. Not a show stopper, just re-register.

[Ms. Toad]

8. No. Republican Senate

Neil Gorsuch replaced Scalia, who would have voted the same way, The blame goes to the Senate who held the seat open because we were only a year away from the next president.

[Volaris]

13. Not even that.

The blame for this miscarriage of Senate Protocol goes to Mitch, and Mitch ALONE. He was in on the fix or he would never have risked it. He KNEW.

[Ms. Toad]

17. I'll buy that. n/t

[Fullduplexxx]

10. 2 words too many dems and indies fkg around with their vote

Too many trying to send "them" a message . Too many thought hillay was too close to wall street . Too many felt it was bernie or no one etc etc ... it wasnt mitch or donald we did this to ourselves . Blaming anyone else feeds the risk of us doing it to ourselves again

[Retrograde]

11. A few more words: the people who stay home in November

not to mention during primaries and special elections.

[Volaris]

12. I'm of the impression that if you paid your taxes, you should get to vote.

'No taxation without representation.'And if you're a citizen, and you're denied your right to vote or turned away at the polls, that should AUTOMATICLLY absolve you of any and all taxes until the next election. ONE CASE. ONE and the fucking GOP will run our registration drives for us, that's how goddamn cheap those fuckers are.

[maxrandb]

14. It's Putin's fault

Mcturtle, Donnie Short Fingers and the Retrumplicans couldn't have done shit without the help of Putin

[Cha]

15. Yeah, thanks to the Russians and Jill Fucking Stein LIES...

Did she even give a shite about the Supreme Court when she was busy telling her suckers Hillary was more dangerous than trump.. even in Swing states?

Or the fucking Environment?

[BSdetect]

16. The gop will do whatever it takes to stop us getting votes

Have we not learned that yet?

Gerrymandering is their forte.

[CrispyQ]

18. A well picked fascist. Illegitimate as hell, but well picked.

Fuck McConnell, one of the most evil fucks in the GOP.