May21

electoral-vote.com

Dem 47

   

GOP 53

Upcoming Supreme Court Decisions

While we are on Supreme Courts, the U.S. Supreme Court is due to release some blockbuster decisions in the next few weeks. Here is a brief roundup of some of the bigger cases.

• Birthright Citizenship: On Day 1 of Trump v2.0, Donald Trump signed an XO ending birthright citizenship for babies born in the U.S. of parents in the country illegally. The Constitution clearly states that everyone born in the country is a citizen. Will the Court rule that the Constitution is unconstitutional? Our guess is that the justices will uphold the Constitution because this issue is not important to them and throwing the Democrats an occasional bone lets the justices pretend to be umpires, just calling balls and strikes, while still giving the Republicans the important stuff, like elections and voting.
  
  
• Transgender Athletes: Twenty-seven states have banned trans girls and women from competing on girls and women's sports teams. Cases from Idaho and West Virginia made it to the Court. Opponents of the laws say that they violate the equal protection provisions of the Constitution. While these cases are not very important and affect only a microscopic number of people, the majority likes to throw some red meat at its base once in a while, so probably it will uphold the states' rights to enact such laws.
  
  
• Independent Agencies: Federal law allows members of independent agency boards to be fired, but only for cause. Trump has fired some just because he doesn't like them, law or no law. He claims Congress has no power to restrict him firing anyone because the president is like a king. If the Court rules he is right, that would upset a precedent going back 90 years. This case is important, so Trump will probably win. On the other hand, if he does, on Jan. 20, 2029, if a Democrat is inaugurated, he or she will fire hundreds of Trump appointees. Then none of the agencies will be independent, which is not what Congress wanted. Every time there is a party switch, there will be a full housecleaning. Somewhere, Andrew "Spoils System" Jackson is smiling.
  
  
• Lisa Cook: Lisa Cook is a member of the Fed's Board of Governors. Trump fired her because he wanted to replace her with his own choice. Bill Pulte of the FHFA dug up two mortgage applications that Cook field before she was on the Fed Board and she claimed a primary residence for two houses. Trump claimed that was sufficient reason to fire her. As we note above, Sean Duffy did the same thing and he wasn't fired. Odd. This one is similar to the item above, only the Fed is so important, the Court may twist itself in knots to let the president fire members and head of agencies except the Fed. The Court knows that if the firing stands, the markets could freak out and that could hurt the Republicans in November.
  
  
• Late-arriving Ballots: Many states allow absentee ballots postmarked on or before Election Day, but arriving later, to be counted. One of them is Mississippi. The administration wants ballots arriving after the close of the polls on Election Day to be thrown out. Governors and Senators from rural states are not with the administration on this one. Since rural areas often have: (1) many Republican voters and (2) slow mail service, banning the grace periods could actually hurt the Republicans more than the Democrats. After all, urban voters can just bring the ballot to a drop box or election office more easily than a voter dozens of miles from any box or office.
  
  
• Temporary Protected Status: The Biden administration granted temporary protected status to 356,000 immigrants from Syria and Haiti. Trump wants to deport them. The legal issues are complicated, but in the end, the justices will just vote on whether they like immigrants from Syria and Haiti. Most of them probably don't.
  
  
• Election Spending: Federal law allows independent super PACs to spend as much money as they can collect. However, they are banned from coordinating their messaging with the candidates they are supporting. Candidates get around this by putting their goals on their websites or giving speeches listing their goals. The super PACs see these and get to work. The Republicans want to get rid of the barrier altogether and allow open coordination as it saves them the trouble of putting their message on their websites. The nominal argument is that the law restricts the free speech of the super PACs. They want to talk to the candidates they support and aren't allowed to. This is a hugely important case so it will probably go 6-3 for the Republicans.
  
  
• Guns: Federal law bans people who use controlled substances from owning a gun. A Texas man who occasionally used marijuana was charged with felony gun possession. His lawyers, from the ACLU and the NRA, not a common alliance, say the law is unconstitutional. The administration is defending the law.

We should know the outcomes on all of these before the calendar turns to summer. (V)