THE COURT V. THE VOTERS

The insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, may have been the work of a mob, but robed judges stood behind it.

According to Douglas, a law professor and author of Vote for US, the Supreme Court’s decisions over the past decade have “contributed to the rise of anti-democracy forces animating our elections.” Some rulings support gerrymandered legislative districts; some defer election standards to state officials whose interest it is to keep those in power there; and some simply erode laws protecting voting rights. “It rules in incremental ways,” writes the author, “chopping away a little here, a little there.” The result is a constitutional guarantee undermined to the point of meaninglessness. When Georgia voters turned out in the 2021 runoff elections and put two Democrats in the Senate, the Republican legislature responded by slashing the number of ballot drop boxes placed in mostly Black precincts, a blatant exercise in voter suppression. Blandly stating that it’s up to the states to decide, the Court has disenfranchised millions of voters. This began longer than a decade ago, of course; Douglas repeatedly circles back to Bush v. Gore and the 2000 presidential election, when the Supreme Court held that a “recount would take too long,” placing the whim of the legislature over the will of the voters. “Essentially,” he adds, “the court’s approach means that state legislatures should have little oversight from the courts, regardless of whether it’s before or after an election.” The Court may have rebuffed many of Trump’s falsely premised lawsuits, but that’s no guarantee that it will intervene judicially the next time a state decides to float a slate of false electors—a scary thought that’s entirely in keeping with many of the Court’s recent decisions.

A solid argument for judicial reform—and if not that, bypassing the Supreme Court whenever possible.