Friday, May 08, 2026

“A Man Hears What He Wants To Hear….”

Justice Alito declared the new year of Jubilee:

In his opinion gutting section 2 of the Voting Rights Act last week, Alito said that Black voter turnout had exceeded white voter turnout in two of the five most recent presidential elections, both nationally and in Louisiana. Alito’s claim was copied almost verbatim from a friend-of-the-court brief filed by the justice department. It was a critical data point Alito used to make the argument that the kind of discrimination that once made the Voting Rights Act necessary no longer exists.

“Vast social change has occurred throughout the country and particularly in the South, where many Section 2 suits arise,” Alito wrote in a majority opinion in the case, which concerned Louisiana’s congressional map, joined by the five other conservative justices on the court. “Black voters now participate in elections at similar rates as the rest of the electorate, even turning out at higher rates than white voters in two of the five most recent Presidential elections nationwide and in Louisiana.”

But a review of turnout and racial data in Louisiana reveals that assertion relies on an unusual methodology. The justice department brief that Alito cited calculated Black and white voter turnout in Louisiana as a proportion of the total population of each racial group over the age of 18. Such an approach is not preferred by experts in calculating statewide turnout because the general over-18 population may include non-citizens, people with felony convictions and others who cannot legally vote. But it does yield Alito’s conclusion that Black voter turnout exceeded white voter turnout in the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections in Louisiana.

The widely accepted approach is to consider voter turnout as a proportion of the citizen voting age population or the voter eligible population, the latter of which excludes non-citizens as well as people who cannot vote because of a felony conviction or because they have been deemed mentally incapacitated. When the Guardian analyzed turnout numbers in Louisiana using the citizen voting age population, it found that Black voter turnout in Louisiana only exceeded white voter turnout in the 2012 presidential election.
That ol' “presumption of regularity” is still alive and well in the Supreme Court, which is yet another problem. Because the DOJ is so clearly undeserving of it, now. (Justice Alito also just likes the facts he likes.)
Group challenging Trump ballroom:

"Defendants claim that the National Trust was 'shown detailed plans and specifications of this knitted, unified, & cohesive structure by Top Officers and Leaders in both the Military and Secret Service.' This statement is false: The National Trust has never been shown non-public plans"
Plaintiff uncorks this argument against Justice Dept:

"Defendants also ignore the reality that—to date—construction has continued unabated. Work at the East Wing site has not been paused for even a single minute, because the injunction has not yet gone into effect. But, the Defendants claim, the events at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner show this lawsuit must be dismissed immediately because it 'endangers the lives of all Presidents, current and future.' That statement is not only utterly unprofessional. It is reckless"
Lots of clear evidence Trump is writing these motions,  or at least insisting his statements (they can’t really be called “arguments”), be included in the pleadings and motions. I’ve seen pro se pleadings that were better drafted; and more coherent.

In regards to the argument about safety, it’s worth noting Trump just took a drive down the drained reflecting pool.
And got out of the car and took questions and insulted reporters, without a qualm. That was probably why.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)