Study found pattern of GOP-appointed judges tipping scales in favor of GOP by making voting harder

[dalton99a]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/16/us/politics/court-packing-judges.html

G.O.P.-Appointed Judges Threaten Democracy, Liberals Seeking Court Expansion Say
A new study found a partisan pattern in rulings that could make it easier or harder to vote, fueling a debate among Democrats over court packing.
By Charlie Savage
Oct. 16, 2020 Updated 1:12 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON — Progressive activists who want Democrats to expand the Supreme Court and pack it with additional liberal justices are mustering a new argument: Republican-appointed jurists, they say, keep using their power to make it harder for Americans to vote.

Backed by a new study of how federal judges and justices have ruled in election-related cases this year, the activists are building on their case for why mainstream Democrats should see their idea as a justified way to restore and protect democracy, rather than as a radical and destabilizing escalation of partisan warfare over the judiciary.

The study, the “Anti-Democracy Scorecard,” was commissioned by the group Take Back the Court, which supports expanding the judiciary. It identified 309 votes by judges and justices in 175 election-related decisions and found a partisan pattern: Republican appointees interpreted the law in a way that impeded ballot access 80 percent of the time, versus 37 percent for Democratic ones.

The numbers were even more stark when limited to judges appointed by President Trump, who has had tremendous success at rapidly reshaping the judiciary. Of 60 rulings in election-related cases, 85 percent were “anti-democracy” according to the analysis.

“There is a systematic pattern of Republican-appointed judges and justices tipping the scales in favor of the G.O.P. by making voting harder,” said Aaron Belkin, a political-science professor and the director of Take Back the Court.

[Nevilledog]

1. Fuckers.

[pecosbob]

2. And in further news, rain is wet.

[lagomorph777]

3. Doing exactly the job they were appointed to do.

[Wellstone ruled]

4. No Sh*t Kilroy!

Most of us already knew this was their end game. Kind of late NY Times.

[DFW]

5. I am quite certain that for McTurtle to even advance their nominations to the Senate

They had to agree (off the record, of course) to inhibit or declare invalid any laws that affirmed or enhanced voting rights. It wouldn't matter what tortured reasoning they used, just as long as they ruled that way. If a higher court were to reverse them, well, there would soon be Trump (i.e. McConnell)-appointed judges there, too. If they wouldn't agree to that, their nominations would be re-considered and dropped, and no one would be the wiser. That conversation never took place, did it?

I am quite certain this question was put to Roberts and Alito about the law that would ultimately become known as Citizens United. Only after answering "yes" to that question, were their names sent on to the Judiciary Committee for consideration.

[dalton99a]

6. +1. It is naive to think otherwise.

[Kid Berwyn]

7. The Feudalist Society

One big criminal conspiracy to pack the courts with corporate friendly fascist kooks.

[dalton99a]

9. Perfect name for that bunch

[hedda_foil]

13. From now on The Feudalist Society it is!

[diva77]

8. K&R Rethugs have been packing the elections officials infrastructure with rethugs as well.

for decades

[BeckyDem]

10. Republicans know they can't win on policy.

[Boogiemack]

11. I didn't need a study to tell me that. nt

[Solly Mack]

12. K&R