(Permanent Musical Accompaniment to This Post)
Being our semi-regular weekly survey of what’s goin’ down in the several states where, as we know, the real work of governmentin’ gets done and where it looks like nothing but rain.
We begin in Wisconsin, where we check in on the country’s most superheated state supreme court race and discover that a certain wealthy South African chain-saw enthusiast has decided to have his fun by perverting the democratic process one more time. From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
Musk took to X, the social media platform he owns, to announce Wednesday evening that “Scott A.” from Green Bay had won the sum for signing Musk’s “Petition in Opposition to Activist Judges.” The petition was announced late last week on the X account of Musk’s super PAC, America PAC. It offers $100 in cash to people who sign the election petition but does not mention a $1 million giveaway.
“Crazy Elon ... his prices are ... INSANE!”
The $1 million giveaway was initially announced by America PAC, though the super PAC’s spending records make no mention of that payment. More than $2 million in independent expenditures in recent days have been for texting, field operations and canvassing.
Let us once again thank Baal for the wisdom of former Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy who, when confronted with the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, was moved to make this remark.
We now conclude that independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption. … The fact that speakers [editor’s note: i.e., donors] may have influence over or access to elected officials does not mean that these officials are corrupt. … The appearance of influence or access, furthermore, will not cause the electorate to lose faith in our democracy.
Good call, Anthony.
At issue in Wisconsin is the ideological balance of the state supreme court. Democrat Susan Crawford is being challenged by career wing nut Brad Schimel. The race is now the most expensive state judicial race in history, and have I mentioned recently what a terrible idea an elected judiciary is? A Schimel victory, and a conservative majority on the Wisconsin court, likely would re-gerrymander the state legislature.
Musk wrote that the next award would be announced Friday. He has spent about $20 million backing conservative Supreme Court candidate Brad Schimel in Tuesday’s election, when Schimel will go head-to-head against liberal Dane County Judge Susan Crawford. Musk’s spending has made him the single largest spender in the race that an election watchdog group has predicted could top a record-breaking $100 million in spending.
Crawford’s campaign spokesman slammed Musk and Schimel over the payouts. “It turns out that Schimel is such a bad candidate that Elon Musk will spend whatever it takes to prop up Schimel’s failing campaign in a corrupt attempt to buy influence on the Supreme Court for his company’s lawsuit,” spokesman Derrick Honeyman said in a statement, referencing the lawsuit by another Musk company, Tesla, against the State of Wisconsin. “It’s corrupt, it’s extreme, and it’s disgraceful to our state and judiciary.”
But not “corrupt.” Ask Mr. Justice Kennedy.
We move along to North Carolina, where another supreme court race continues to stagger on because the Republican candidate declines to accept defeat, choosing instead to challenge a huge number of ballots on what are apparently bogus grounds. Republican Jefferson Griffin lost to incumbent Democrat Allison Riggs by 734 votes. This result has been certified through two recounts. He now has gone to a court of appeals to argue that the election rules should be changed retroactively and thousands of votes be tossed out. The grounds are spurious at best; Griffin seeks to eliminate ballots cast by voters whose registrations lacked driver’s license or Social Security numbers even though neither was required at the time of the election.
As it happens, on Monday, the Supreme Court of the United States heard arguments in Louisiana v. Callais, another critical voting-rights case, this one aimed at gutting section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which is the last viable element of that landmark bill left functioning after the carefully manufactured conservative majority on the court got done with it. At issue was a court order mandating that Louisiana create a second majority-minority district. A good measure of section 2’s future is the fact that even the lawyers arguing Louisiana’s case told the court that they thought section 2 was unconstitutional but that they followed it anyway. Thanks, folks. However, the liberal justices, most notably Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, noticed that one side seemed to be arguing that it could ignore an adverse ruling. As we know, there’s a lot of that going around. Jackson said:
I mean, I ... am sort of concerned about your view—as seemingly expressed, and I want you to clarify it—that a court order compelling you to do something is not a good reason for you to do it.
Kagan, meanwhile, was struck by the fact that the people opposed to the new district kept getting beaten in court, only to come back for more.
So ... I get the idea that it did have the option to keep on finding ways to litigate this question, but ... there were ways that it could have refused to give up. I take that point. But at some point, it said ... we’ve been told we’re wrong by seven judges, and we’re going to accept that and we’re going to move on and find a map. And then the state lawyers come in and ... the record is the state lawyer says there can be no better reasons to believe that the VRA required a second majority Black district than a precedential opinion of the Fifth Circuit affirming that a map with a single majority Black district likely violated section 2. And the state lawyer talks about all the process that they went through and all—and hearing that they had and the maps that were submitted. And she says what better reason could there be for this?
Republicans simply do not lose elections. That is a hard and fast rule in American politics. They just run out the clock, and the clock never reaches zero.
And we conclude, as is our custom, in the great state of Oklahoma, whence Blog Official Oyster Shucker Friedman of the Algarve brings us the tale of some ducks who seem to have a very good class action lawsuit. From KFOR:
Nine ducks are now recovering after diesel fuel leaked into a duck pond at the University of Oklahoma earlier this month. News 4 first reported on the ducks last week when residents voiced concerns about a strong chemical odor coming from the pond and an oily substance covering the ducks. The Department of Environmental Quality later told News 4 a power plant pump had malfunctioned, causing diesel to leak into the duck pond.
On Tuesday, News 4 learned that nine ducks were washed with a solution and are now undergoing waterproofing therapy in a special pool. While WildCare says the ducks do show signs of chemical burns, especially around the eyes, they currently don’t have any symptoms of gastrointestinal issues from swallowing the fuel. The ducks have been given medication that the organization hopes will reduce their chances of developing ulcers.
Sue ’em, boys. Get it while you can.
This is your democracy, America. Cherish it.
