Your results may vary: Unintended consequences for Republicans

This is surely not SCOTUSblog, but let’s look at two significant court rulings from yesterday:

In both cases, Republicans claimed that their position was the prudent one, noting the deadline crunch in the census case and ballot security issues in the drop-off location case. Opponents claimed that Republicans were trying to restrict the electoral power of minorities, particularly those of Hispanic heritage, by deliberately undercounting them in the census (which could result in states losing seats in Congress, among other issues) and making it more difficult for them to cast their votes.

(more…)

Why the Michigan Supreme Court decision really matters

Back in July I wrote a post called “Why Trump v. Vance really matters.” In it, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that Donald Trump’s tax records could be subpoenaed by a grand jury in Manhattan. The 7-2 decision (which included Chief Justice Roberts and Trump appointees Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch) was significant because it held that no one, not even the chief executive of the country, was above the law.

On October 3, the Michigan Supreme Court decided that Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (who is a Democrat) had violated the state’s constitution by continuing to renew the declarations of a state of emergency, even after the state legislature (which is controlled by Republicans) had refused to legitimize them by approving the extensions. The Court held that, under the various constitutional and legislative acts Whitmer was using to justify her actions, the legislature did, in fact, need to weigh in, and she was not authorized to continue to re-up the declarations on her own authority.

(more…)