Supreme Court Steps Into 2024 Election & Culture Wars
Oct 31, 2024
auto_awesome
Richard Briffault, a Columbia Law School professor, dives into the Supreme Court's ruling that allows Virginia to purge its voter rolls, highlighting its political implications. Todd Haugh, from Indiana University, examines a Texas judge's unexpected focus on diversity in the Boeing case, shining light on corporate accountability. Alex Ebert, Bloomberg Law's senior correspondent, reveals the unique characteristics of New Jersey's Supreme Court, discussing its political dynamics and the influence of dark money on judicial elections.
The Supreme Court's decision to allow Virginia's voter roll purge highlights the conflicts between state policies and federal voting regulations amidst concerns over election integrity.
In the Boeing case, the Texas judge's critique of reliance on diversity criteria over qualifications in selecting a corporate monitor reflects ongoing tensions in balancing compliance with evolving representation norms.
Deep dives
Supreme Court Involvement in Voter Purging
The Supreme Court has authorized Virginia to conduct a voter roll purge, impacting over 1,600 residents, amidst concerns that it violates federal law. The governor asserted that the purge involved individuals self-identifying as non-citizens and argued that the 90-day pre-election quiet period does not apply in this situation. However, federal courts previously ruled that such mass purges should be prohibited during this period to prevent errors and protect voter rights. This decision highlights the tension between state-level actions and federal voting regulations.
Political Implications of Voter Fraud Claims
The issue of non-citizen voting has been a contentious topic, often utilized by Republicans to question the legitimacy of elections. Claims that non-citizen voters significantly impact results lack substantive evidence, yet such narratives have been politically leveraged by figures like Donald Trump. The Virginia case serves as a potential precursor for broader election challenges based on unfounded accusations of non-citizen voting, perpetuating the idea despite a lack of evidence. This situation underscores the ongoing battle regarding electoral integrity and the framing of voting-related policies.
Judicial Oversight on Corporate Monitors
In a notable legal case against Boeing concerning its 737 MAX crashes, a Texas judge has expressed concerns over diversity criteria in the selection of an independent corporate monitor. The U.S. Department of Justice's inclusion of diversity, equity, and inclusion standards in the plea deal aims to widen the selection pool and remedy past inequalities within monitor appointments. Critics, including the judge, emphasize that the focus should remain on the skills and qualifications of potential monitors rather than adherence to DEI frameworks. This situation illustrates the complexities of balancing compliance oversight with evolving norms around diversity and representation.
New Jersey's Unique Judicial System
New Jersey's Supreme Court operates under a tradition of bipartisanship, achieving notable unanimity in its decisions despite political affiliations among justices. The state's process involves appointing justices with a four-to-three balance, encouraging collaboration due to the potential for changes in the political landscape. This contrasts starkly with the contentious and heavily funded judicial elections seen in many other states where partisanship heavily influences outcomes. The judicial selections in New Jersey emphasize merit and consensus, suggesting a model that stabilizes the law despite the underlying political tensions present nationwide.
Richard Briffault, a professor at Columbia Law School, discusses the Supreme Court’s conservative justices allowing Virginia to purge its voter rolls. Todd Haugh, an associate professor of business law and ethics at Indiana University, discusses a Texas judge injecting a culture wars issue into the Boeing case. Alex Ebert, Bloomberg Law senior correspondent, discusses what makes New Jersey’s Supreme Court so different. June Grasso hosts.