Supreme Court Decisions Only Matter To Republicans When They Go Their Way

// Everybody knows that rules are rules — simple as that. Unless of course your attempt at racial gerrymandering doesn’t work; then, it only makes sense to invoke the totally legitimate and not made-up independent state legislature theory. And if, for whatever reason, the Supreme Court decides that state legislatures don’t actually have authority over state courts, then that’s that. That’s one of the things about the rule of law — laws don’t only bind when you like them. Unfortunately, that isn’t one of the things true about contemporary republicanism.

Democrats please note that the law & order party has established that obeying Supreme Court rulings is optional. https://t.co/kAbihSTIm8

— A.R. Moxon (@JuliusGoat) July 21, 2023

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-top-300x250" ); });

Some of you may think that there is no need to set off the alarms. Do we even know that the new map will also cut off Black people from being able to vote? And to those people, I say you must not have seen this:

Sponsored Take Your Firm’s Work To The Next Level With Neos Try Neos, the case management platform that will supercharge your firm's productivity. From Assembly Software and Above The Law  

Alabama GOP refuses to draw second Black district, despite Supreme Court order.

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., have been calling state legislators about the map, which could affect control of Congress. https://t.co/xDS65ikKx0

— evie ღ 🌻 (@eviebauer727) July 21, 2023

If buying a Supreme Court justice or two… or three… or four doesn’t work, the right has an impressive way of bypassing the rules while heavily insisting on being the ones to enforce them. Remember when they were trying to use “constitutional sheriffs” to bypass the rulings they didn’t like?

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-middle-300x250" ); }); googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-storycontent-440x100" ); }); googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-in-story-youtube-1x1" ); });

Frederick County Sheriff Jenkins calls himself part of the “constitutional sheriff” movement that resists federal authority on COVID, election results and gun policy. He's accused of breaking the law with a local gun dealer to illegally sell machine guns. https://t.co/1bTHJdFrGT

— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) April 5, 2023

Constitutional sheriffing is an admittedly thorny road. When I wrote about its use on an issue I cared about, I at least had enough decency to admit that it requires treading complicated waters that get muddied really quickly when it’s about the stuff you don’t like as much. Good luck finding that transparency on the other side:

Sponsored Sponsored This Early Adopter Found Success With Legal AI. Here’s How You Can, Too Hear how one company brought the power of artificial intelligence into its contracting workflow. From LexCheck and Above The Law   Sponsored The Digital Transformation Imperative Private funds’ in-house and external legal teams are stretched thin by growing legal demands. Firms need digital transformation to thrive. From Troy Pospisil, Ontra CEO   Sponsored Clio Users: New Ways To Add Value To Your Practice! Want to quickly and easily identify the products that work well with Clio? Read on. From Above The Law   Sponsored This Early Adopter Found Success With Legal AI. Here’s How You Can, Too Hear how one company brought the power of artificial intelligence into its contracting workflow. From LexCheck and Above The Law  

Would be nice if this triggered a single minute of self-reflection from the pundits who believed conservatives when they said they were against "cancel culture." https://t.co/jCKlVLdUMH

— Michael Hobbes (@RottenInDenmark) July 21, 2023

If only there was an act of some sort to protect the rights of voters. A voting rights act, if you will. Oh yeah, the Court basically got rid of that. Call me crazy, but I think the majority opinion said something about no longer needing such preemptive measures? Bet whoever wrote that is feeling really smart right about now.

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-bottom-300x250" ); });

Chris Williams became a social media manager and assistant editor for Above the Law in June 2021. Prior to joining the staff, he moonlighted as a minor Memelord™ in the Facebook group Law School Memes for Edgy T14s.  He endured Missouri long enough to graduate from Washington University in St. Louis School of Law. He is a former boatbuilder who cannot swim, a published author on critical race theory, philosophy, and humor, and has a love for cycling that occasionally annoys his peers. You can reach him by email at [email protected] and by tweet at @WritesForRent.

Sponsored Sponsored Take Your Firm’s Work To The Next Level With Neos Try Neos, the case management platform that will supercharge your firm's productivity. From Assembly Software and Above The Law   Sponsored Security: The Stakes May Be Higher Than You Think We surveyed Above the Law’s readers on challenges facing smaller law firms. Join us to learn what we found. CLE credit available if you attend… From iManage and Above The Law   Topics

Courts, Election Law, Racial Gerrymandering, Supreme Court, Voting