The hosts recap Supreme Court oral arguments, including a voting rights case. They discuss corruption, billionaires' influence, and predict outcomes. They explore a case on racial gerrymandering and its implications. The role of racial data and partisanship in redistricting is analyzed. They discuss potential Supreme Court decisions and a recent controversial court ruling. Also mentioned are a college classmate's memorial fund, podcasts, wine, and online education.
Read more
AI Summary
AI Chapters
Episode notes
auto_awesome
Podcast summary created with Snipd AI
Quick takeaways
The Murray v. UBS Securities case examines the burden of proof in whistleblower retaliation cases and its implications for whistleblower protection laws.
The Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP case focuses on redistricting and the standard of review for assessing expert testimonies, with significant implications for voting rights and representation.
The podcast raises concerns about the Supreme Court's approach to safeguarding voting rights and democracy, citing previous decisions that dismantled key provisions of the Voting Rights Act and declared partisan gerrymandering a non-justiciable political question.
Deep dives
The podcast episode discusses the Murray v. UBS Securities case involving whistleblower protection
The podcast recaps the Murray v. UBS Securities case, which centers around the question of whether a whistleblower must prove that their employer intended to retaliate or if the employer must prove a lack of retaliatory intent. The case involves Trevor Murray, who claims he was fired by UBS for reporting alleged fraud on shareholders. The outcome of this case has implications for whistleblower protection laws.
The podcast highlights the importance of race in redistricting cases
The podcast delves into the Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP case, which focuses on redistricting and the use of race in drawing legislative districts. The justices discuss whether race predominated in the drawing of the districts and the standard of review for assessing expert testimonies. The outcome of this case will have significant implications for voting rights and representation.
The podcast critiques the Supreme Court's handling of voting rights cases
The podcast raises concerns about the Supreme Court's previous decisions, such as Shelby County v. Holder, which dismantled a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, and Rucho v. Common Cause, which declared partisan gerrymandering a non-justiciable political question. The hosts express skepticism towards the court's approach and question whether the court is adequately safeguarding voting rights and democracy.
South Carolina legislature's post hoc justifications for district drawing
The South Carolina legislature initially drew districts without asserting a partisan advantage, but later justified their actions with post hoc justifications. These justifications were seen as suspect under the law, as they were not the original intent. The district court found evidence that race played a significant role in drawing the districts, which led to a successful challenge regarding racial gerrymandering.
Implications of reliance on race in district drawing
The use of race in district drawing can be seen as a substitute for limited partisanship data. It may be viewed as more probative in predicting future voting behavior compared to registration or presidential election data. The legislature's reliance on race could be attributed to a lack of available data and the belief that race is a better indicator of partisanship. It is suggested that the legislature may have intentionally avoided embracing the notion of partisan gerrymandering, despite engaging in racial gerrymandering.
Melissa, Kate, and Leah recap the oral arguments the Supreme Court heard last week, including a big one about voting rights and redistricting (Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP). Plus, an update on the shenanigans around the Wisconsin Supreme Court and the tomfoolery in the Fifth Circuit.
Read ProPublica's reporting on how U.S. Representative James Clyburn was involved in the South Carolina redistricting plan that's now before the Supreme Court
Please consider donating the memorial fund for Maggie Rossman, a college classmate of Leah's who recently died from complications in childbirth
Follow @CrookedMedia on Instagram for more original content, host takeovers and other community events.