HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Supreme Court Reinstates ...

Wed Oct 21, 2020, 10:56 PM

Supreme Court Reinstates Alabama's Ban on Curbside Voting

Source: WSJ

WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court reinstated Alabama’s ban on curbside voting Wednesday, blocking a lower court order that allowed county officials to use the accommodation so that disabled citizens could cast ballots more safely during the coronavirus pandemic.

The eight-member court’s conservative majority issued the order without an opinion explaining its rationale; the court’s three liberals dissented.

The 5-3 decision was the latest in a wave of coronavirus-related election cases reaching the court, as voters, officials and political parties fight over voting procedures roiled by a pandemic that spreads through close contact.

In Alabama, a group of elderly and disabled voters and four advocacy groups filed suit in federal court seeking several accommodations in relation to the pandemic. When those accommodations were granted by a federal judge, state officials appealed.

Read more: https://www.wsj.com/articles/supreme-court-reinstates-alabamas-ban-on-curbside-voting-11603337129



Roberts is a loose cannon. He has become completely unpredictable.

10 replies, 1445 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 10 replies Author Time Post
Reply Supreme Court Reinstates Alabama's Ban on Curbside Voting (Original post)
Polybius Oct 21 OP
SunSeeker Oct 21 #1
Renew Deal Oct 22 #2
dem in texas Oct 22 #3
ananda Oct 22 #6
CountMyVote4Reality Oct 22 #4
cstanleytech Oct 22 #5
Sherman A1 Oct 22 #7
Lonestarblue Oct 22 #8
riversedge Oct 22 #9
melm00se Oct 22 #10

Response to Polybius (Original post)

Wed Oct 21, 2020, 11:05 PM

1. Sickening ruling. The SCOTUS Republicans are pigs with no conscience.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2020, 12:14 AM

2. The pattern I noticed is that they try to respect state law in every case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2020, 02:04 AM

3. Why?

Curbside voting for disabled has been available in Dallas, Texas for years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dem in texas (Reply #3)

Thu Oct 22, 2020, 04:25 AM

6. Here too.

It seems a no brainer.

It will only get worse with Barrett on the court.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2020, 02:11 AM

4. Our Government Hates Us. They want us to die.

Our rulers truly fear our votes as if they are pitchforks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2020, 02:50 AM

5. Notice how conservatives controlled court after conservative court protects Republican politicians

from suffering from the consequences at the polls by the voters for the politicians actions?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2020, 04:56 AM

7. Grrr 😡

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2020, 07:01 AM

8. Based on this SC's record on voting rights, Democrats may have to expand the Court.

There were a couple of interesting opinion pieces a few days ago in the Washington Post outlining how to legislate to accomplish Democrats’ policy goals rather than expand the Court. Someone here suggested that the first legislation Democrats should pass if they regain control of the Senate is a bill to expand the Court and just sit on it. Good idea. That sends a very clear message to the Court that their partisan politics are on trial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2020, 08:20 AM

9. these 5 to 3 rulings will continue

until the Handmaiden is installed, then 6-3 for a decade or two while our civil rights grind down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2020, 10:30 AM

10. Point of fact

Here is the reasoning of the court (I highlighted the reason)

The application for stay presented to JUSTICE THOMAS and by him referred to the Court is granted, and the district court’s September 30, 2020 order granting a permanent injunction is stayed pending disposition of the appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, if such writ is timely sought. Should the petition for a writ of certiorari be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event the petition for a writ of certiorari is granted, the stay shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court.


I interpret this as the appellant jumped the gun and went straight to the Supreme Court rather than letting the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to do their job.

The dissent, in a nut shell, is basically saying that COVID should mean that the judicial process can be shortcut.

I can see both sides here and understand that the timing on this one is pretty tight with election day 12 days away. It should be noted, however, that when the Supreme Court rules, it becomes precedent and the "why" the Court chose to act (lets say because of COVID) may not be really relevant 1, 10, 20, 60 years down the road but the Court ruled and "so it is written, so it is done" (to quote Yul Brynner) and we are stuck with the decision (right or wrong, good or bad) until the Court choses to overrule itself (which has been a topic here in the past).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread