Short Circuit
Short Circuit 245 | A Texas-Sized “And”
Episode guests
Podcast summary created with Snipd AI
Quick takeaways
- Voting rights groups in Texas were denied standing to challenge changes to the state's voting laws, even though the new rules seemed problematic.
- A case in the Fifth Circuit analyzed the interpretation of 'and' in the First Step Act's safety valve provision, with differing opinions on whether the criminal history criteria should be read conjunctively or disjunctively.
Deep dives
Case summary: Texas state LULAC versus Elphont
Texas state LULAC and Voto Latino challenged Texas' revised requirements for voter residency. The dispute arose when the Texas legislature passed SB 1111, which included a provision requiring individuals with registration forms that didn't correspond to a physical address to provide documentation of a residential address in Texas. The district court upheld the law but struck down the PO box provision. LULAC and Voto Latino appealed to the Fifth Circuit and argued for organizational standing, claiming that the law diverted resources and chilled speech. The court disagreed and found that the plaintiffs failed to establish a direct link between the diversion of resources specifically to SB 1111 and the chilling of speech. As a result, they were denied standing.
Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts
