Update: Alabama has filed its replies in the redistricting stay requests at #SCOTUS, so the briefing is now completed. A decision could come at any time.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23a231.html
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23a241.html
@chrisgeidner We will find out soon enough how compromised Kavanaugh is.
I love how you jumped right into the conspiracy theory without bothering to wait for the go-ahead.
The best part about zany conspiracy theories is that you can pull the trigger on them at any point and they are equally respectable and reasonable.
@tobie1 @volkris I mean, it was his concurrence in the case in June. It's not really something secret. I wrote about it that day: https://www.lawdork.com/p/surprising-voting-rights-victory-at-scotus
The problem is, I think you got so caught up in telling a compelling and dramatic story of personalities that you lost sight of what the ruling *actually said.*
Yes, you may have written that, but when talking about what the Court said, it would be much better to have actually quoted from the Court, not this dramatization of your own composition that seems so far from the work of the court itself.
Self-citation isn't exactly bringing in an ally, after all :)
There has been so much misreporting about these cases, but if you read the SCOTUS ruling and what AL did, they complied with the ruling.
Perhaps SCOTUS will clarify and say that AL effectively exploited a loophole, or maybe they're say AL got it right.
But there's been a lot of misreporting about what the ruling actually said, allowing for these narratives that AL defied a ruling when really they complied with the letter of the law, so to speak.
@volkris @chrisgeidner Not even AL is saying they're upholding the Court's ruling. They're saying the court made an error.
https://www.scotusblog.com/2023/09/alabama-returns-to-the-supreme-court-over-allegedly-discriminatory-voting-map/
Alabama is saying the *district court* made an error in failing to notice that AL is upholding the *Supreme Court's* ruling.
The Supreme Court "in Allen never said the measure of a congressional redistricting plan’s compliance with §2 is as simple as counting the number of majority-minority districts" as the district court insists. [1]
All of this reporting that AL is violating the Supreme Court ruling is misleading at best and outright false at worse.
@volkris @chrisgeidner There has been quite a bit of reporting of late that one of the reasons Alabama was so confident about defying SCOTUS's ruling in June on Alabama's Congressional districts was that Kavanaugh might be open to reconsidering his vote in that case and to ditching Section 2 of the VRA.
My toot saying we will know in time whether this reporting is true is a far cry from a conspiracy theory.