🚨 Supreme Court Makes MASSIVE RULINGS before MIDTERMS | Unprecedented
Quick Read
Summary
Takeaways
- ❖Alan Dershowitz is petitioning the Supreme Court to weaken the 'actual malice' standard established in *Times v. Sullivan*, which protects journalists reporting on public figures.
- ❖The Supreme Court's conservative majority (the 'MAGA six') is seen as willing to overturn established precedent (*stare decisis*) based on their belief that prior decisions were 'wrongly decided'.
- ❖The Court issued an emergency order blocking New York's new redistricting maps, an unprecedented intervention that bypassed the state's highest court.
- ❖The Supreme Court rejected attempts by a right-wing group to force more aggressive voter roll purges under the National Voter Registration Act, a rare 'win' for voting rights.
- ❖The hosts predict a negative ruling for the Louisiana voting rights case (*Cala*), potentially further weakening the Voting Rights Act.
Insights
1Threat to Press Freedom: Dershowitz's Challenge to Times v. Sullivan
Alan Dershowitz has filed a petition with the Supreme Court challenging the 'actual malice' standard for defamation against public figures, established in the 1964 *Times v. Sullivan* case. He seeks to replace 'reckless disregard for the truth' with a new, undefined 'foolish disregard' standard. The hosts highlight that Justices Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh have publicly expressed a desire to revisit or overturn *Times v. Sullivan*, making this petition a significant threat to journalistic protections. The Supreme Court's request for CNN's response indicates serious consideration of the case.
Dershowitz filed a petition against CNN, aiming to remove the protections journalists have. Justice Clarence Thomas and Alito have signaled for years they want to redo *Times v. Sullivan*. Kavanaugh has been public about not thinking *Times v. Sullivan* is necessary. The Supreme Court is asking CNN to respond to the petition.
2Supreme Court's Unprecedented Intervention in New York Redistricting
The Supreme Court issued an emergency order blocking new redistricting maps in New York, forcing the state to use 2026 maps instead. This action is described as unprecedented because the Court intervened directly, bypassing the state's highest court (Court of Appeals). The hosts argue this is an 'abusive aspect' of the Court's power, using the 'shadow docket' to interfere with state electoral processes and undermine state judicial authority, particularly concerning minority voting interests.
The Supreme Court, with a 6-3 majority, sent New York back to using 2026 maps, not new maps ordered by a lower court. Justice Sotomayor noted it was one of the first times the Supreme Court completely blocked a state court process without allowing it to go to the highest state court. The Court used the shadow docket to cut out the state's highest court.
3Defense of Voter Registration Against Purge Attempts
The Supreme Court rejected two petitions from the Public Interest Legal Foundation, a right-wing group, that sought to force states (Michigan and Pennsylvania) to take more aggressive action to remove voters from registration rolls under the National Voter Registration Act (Motor Voter Law). The group also sought standing to access state voter data for this purpose. The Supreme Court's decision not to allow these measures is framed as a 'win' for voting rights, preventing efforts to suppress voting in the name of 'fraud investigations' that the hosts argue are baseless.
The Public Interest Legal Foundation sought to interpret 'reasonable action' in the Motor Voter Law to require more aggressive voter removal and sought standing to access state voter data. The Supreme Court said no to both petitions, pushing out this right-wing bid.
Key Concepts
Stare Decisis
The legal principle of upholding prior judicial decisions. The hosts argue the current Supreme Court's conservative majority disregards this principle, viewing their role as 'fixing' past precedents they deem 'wrongly decided,' leading to judicial activism rather than conservative restraint.
Actual Malice Standard (Times v. Sullivan)
A legal standard requiring public figures suing for defamation to prove that the defamatory statement was made with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth. Alan Dershowitz's petition seeks to lower this high bar, which the hosts argue would dismantle protections for journalists.
Shadow Docket
The Supreme Court's use of emergency orders and summary decisions, often without full briefing or oral arguments. The hosts criticize its use in the New York redistricting case as an 'abusive aspect' of the Court's power, allowing it to intervene in state matters without traditional judicial process.
Lessons
- Understand that the Supreme Court's conservative majority is actively challenging established legal precedents, particularly those related to press freedom and voting rights.
- Recognize the 'shadow docket' as a mechanism the Supreme Court uses to make significant rulings without full judicial process, often bypassing state courts.
- Engage in voting and voter advocacy, as the hosts emphasize that increased voter turnout is the primary defense against perceived attempts to suppress votes and influence elections.
Notable Moments
Discussion of the 'MAGA six' justices' approach to stare decisis.
The hosts argue that the conservative majority views its role as 'fixing' prior precedents they believe were 'wrongly decided,' rather than upholding them. This perspective enables judicial activism and undermines the stability of legal principles.
The hosts' strong criticism of the Supreme Court's intervention in New York's redistricting maps.
This moment highlights the perceived overreach of the Supreme Court into state-level electoral processes, using emergency orders to bypass traditional appeals and potentially influence election outcomes.
Quotes
"If you're a public figure, it's got to be at the level of actual malice."
"They see their role as fixing prior precedent that they think was wrongly decided."
"We embrace voting. We're not afraid of voting. We encourage voting. More voting the better. Republicans try to suppress voting."
"It's going to be an overwhelming wave election against Donald Trump, sweeping him and all of MAGA so to speak out of power."
Q&A
Recent Questions
Related Episodes
Warnock UNLOADS on Trump SAVE Act. Calls It a Power Grab to Block Voters
"Senator Raphael Warnock vehemently opposes the 'SAVE Act,' framing it as a politically motivated voter suppression tactic that disproportionately disenfranchises eligible citizens under the false pretense of preventing non-existent voter fraud."
Trump RUSHES Election Scheme as Midterms HAUNT HIM
"The hosts and guest expose the SAVE Act as a deceptive voter suppression tactic, drawing a stark contrast between the protection of gun rights and the erosion of voting rights."
Trump PANICS at SCOTUS as He Gets BRUTALLY REBUKED | Unprecedented
"The Supreme Court's recent rulings and upcoming hearings signal a significant shift in election law, civil rights for transgender individuals, and the independence of the Federal Reserve, with profound implications for American democracy and economic stability."
LIVE | TikTok Psychic Trial, Judgment and what comes next. Plus an unexpected lawsuit.
"A TikTok creator, self-representing in a federal defamation trial, was ordered to pay $10 million for falsely accusing an Idaho professor of orchestrating murders and having an affair, setting a significant precedent for online accountability."