Wisconsin elections head says the state is ready for 2024

[link removed]


** 6/14/2024
------------------------------------------------------------

Republicans seek to remove a key provision of the federal Voting Rights Act as a legal remedy for individuals and groups. The newly-elected head of Wisconsin’s election regulatory agency says officials are learning from 2020 as they prepare for this fall’s election. And, Democrats in Congress remain indignant over potential ethical lapses on the U.S. Supreme Court.


** The legal argument that could jeopardize Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act
------------------------------------------------------------

Over the past year, Republicans have spearheaded ([link removed]) or joined ([link removed]) arguments in a number of cases pending in federal appeals courts that could threaten the ability of individuals and organizations to bring lawsuits under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) — a crucial federal provision used to challenge racially discriminatory voting laws and electoral maps.

Most recently, Louisiana officials are dragging their heels on the process of redrawing the state’s legislative maps until the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals — the nation’s most conservative federal appeals court — rules on the question of whether private parties are allowed to bring claims under the federal provision.

A federal district court struck down Louisiana’s House and Senate districts for a Section 2 violation months ago. But state officials want the 5th Circuit to reach the same conclusion the 8th Circuit did last year, which is that private litigants ([link removed]) don’t have the right to bring lawsuits under Section 2, only the U.S. attorney general. Louisiana was apparently undeterred by the 5th Circuit’s rejection of a similar request ([link removed]) in December.

While attacks on Section 2 are nothing new, the 8th Circuit’s November ruling seemed to spur a new wave of arguments against the right of voters to sue under the provision.

Legal experts and voting rights advocates have long expressed their alarm at the prospect of voters losing Section 2 as an option for challenging discriminatory voting practices or unfair maps. “Under the Federal VRA, we're getting down to pretty thin ice if this is adopted,” Doug Spencer, an election law professor at the University of Colorado, told Democracy Docket. “It would be just a hair's shy of invalidating the entire [VRA].”

Spencer said because Section 2 cases are overwhelmingly brought by private parties, it’s likely that fewer cases will be brought if they’re no longer allowed to sue under the provision. “That's what keeps me up at night,” he said, “is that if this theory gets adopted, it would end Section 2, in practice.” More here on how this issue is impacting Louisiana and other states. ([link removed])

Wisconsin’s election agency chair says officials have learned from 2020

The Wisconsin Elections Commission unanimously tapped a Democrat to lead it for another term as the 2024 race gears up in the battleground state.

Ann Jacobs, who was elected as chair on Monday, told Democracy Docket that election workers have learned from the challenges of the 2020 presidential election and are preparing Wisconsinites for 2024. When asked how she plans to combat disinformation, especially as tech emerges ([link removed]) as a potential threat, she said the six-member bipartisan commission has been “aggressive” in directing people to accurate information on Wisconsin’s elections website.

In other words, counter falsehoods with facts.

“We're really trying to make sure that anytime something comes up, that we're doing an FAQ,” she said. “So I think that [residents’] trusted reliance on us is the way to combat the worst of it.” Read more about Jacob’s plan here. ([link removed])
[link removed]

Our bestselling tie-dye tee is back! Now in two colors, you can show your love for democracy and support for our work all summer long.
SHOP NOW ([link removed])


** Democrats decry ‘ethics crisis’ on U.S. Supreme Court
------------------------------------------------------------

Congressional Democrats hammered the U.S. Supreme Court this week as Justice Samuel Alito remains in the headlines for ethically questionable conduct.

On Tuesday, Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland joined New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse and others for a roundtable discussion about what they describe as an “ethics crisis” on the high Court. “The Supreme Court is currently facing a grave crisis of legitimacy,” Ocasio-Cortez said, “and it is a crisis of its own making.”

Their concerns aren’t unfounded. Alito’s heavily-publicized flag incident raised questions of whether the nation’s highest Court needs stronger accountability for the conduct of its justices. Alito recently rejected calls to recuse himself ([link removed]) from any Jan. 6 or 2020 election-related cases — specifically the Trump immunity case — over the flag incident. This week, an audio recording of Alito surfaced ([link removed]) in which he seemed to dismiss criticisms of the Court as partisan attacks. He and his wife had much more to say ([link removed]) , according to media reports.

House Democrats are currently pushing a bill that would establish an investigative body ([link removed]) within the U.S. Supreme Court, but previous proposals have failed to gain traction in Congress. Last year, the Court adopted ([link removed]) a Code of Conduct agreed upon by all nine justices, but there is no means of enforcement. Tuesday’s hearing seemed to indicate that some Democrats aren’t satisfied with how the Court has responded to their concerns.

“The pressure campaign has worked to the degree that they are now at least nominally under an ethics code,” Whitehouse said. “But we need to keep the pressure on until they join the rest of the government in having a real ethics code with real fact finding.” Read more about the House Democrats’ bill here. ([link removed])


** OPINION: Between Yachts and Flags, It’s Time for Supreme Court Accountability
------------------------------------------------------------
[link removed]

ICYMI, guest authors Rakim Brooks and Keith Thirion echoed mounting concerns about ethics issues on the U.S. Supreme Court and argued that Congress must respond. “At the minimum,” they wrote, “that should include hearings and investigations into the justices’ unethical and compromising behavior.” Read more here. ([link removed])
We now offer an annual option for our premium subscription!
BECOME A MEMBER ([link removed])

Our premium subscription ensures that our team of 14 can do the hard work of keeping you informed and up to date on what is happening to our democracy in courtrooms across the country. Consider joining today for $120/year ([link removed]) ($10/month) to receive our premium content directly in your inbox, starting tomorrow morning with Marc's weekend reading list.
** What We’re Doing
------------------------------------------------------------

Democracy Docket’s Matt Cohen reveals the inner-workings of another right-wing legal machine seeking to undermine voting rights in the U.S. This time, Cohen zeroes in on Judicial Watch, which he describes as “a right-wing legal group that’s constantly filing all manner of litigation against the government — Freedom of Information Act lawsuits, challenges to immigration policy, attempts to thwart environmental actions and any other issue that riles up Republicans.” Read more here. ([link removed])
[link removed]

Pod Save America co-host, former Obama senior advisor and writer Dan Pfeiffer joins Defending Democracy to discuss the role of media in protecting democracy, polls and changes in politics over the past 20 years with Marc Elias. Watch on YouTube here. ([link removed])
[link removed] [link removed] [link removed] [link removed] [link removed] [link removed]

This is our free daily newsletter — help keep it that way and support ([link removed]) our work. You can upgrade ([link removed]) to our premium subscription to unlock exclusive insights, news and more. Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences ([link removed][UNIQID]&c=b3a650c307&utm_source=Democracy+Docket+Newsletters&utm_campaign=9c72683e66-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2024_03_07_09_02_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-5146e64680-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D&mc_cid=9c72683e66&mc_eid=UNIQID) or unsubscribe from this list ([link removed][UNIQID]&c=b3a650c307&utm_source=Democracy+Docket+Newsletters&utm_campaign=9c72683e66-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2024_03_07_09_02_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-5146e64680-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D&mc_cid=9c72683e66&mc_eid=UNIQID) .

This email was sent to [email protected] (mailto:[email protected])
why did I get this? ([link removed]) unsubscribe from this list ([link removed]) update subscription preferences ([link removed])
Democracy Docket LLC . 250 Massachusetts Ave NW Ste 400 . Washington, DC 20001-5825 . USA