{"id":596637,"date":"2026-05-05T15:30:00","date_gmt":"2026-05-05T15:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/?p=596637"},"modified":"2026-05-05T15:30:00","modified_gmt":"2026-05-05T15:30:00","slug":"alito-punches-back-after-ketanji-insult-following-scotus-decision-on-voting-rights-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/?p=596637","title":{"rendered":"Alito Punches Back After Ketanji Insult Following SCOTUS Decision On Voting Rights"},"content":{"rendered":"

Alito Punches Back After Ketanji Insult Following SCOTUS Decision On Voting Rights<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Authored by Amy Howe via scotusblog.com,<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

The Supreme Court on Monday night\u00a0granted a request<\/a>\u00a0to immediately finalize its opinion in\u00a0Louisiana v. Callais<\/em><\/a>, in which it struck down that state\u2019s congressional map, to allow Louisiana to draw a new map in time for the 2026 elections. <\/strong><\/p>\n

[ZH: Democrats are raging as] that map is expected to favor Republicans,<\/strong> who currently hold four of the state\u2019s six seats in the U.S. House of Representatives but could pick up one or even two more under a revised map.<\/p>\n

\n

The United States Supreme Court, in the eyes of America and the world. pic.twitter.com\/xerjBPgDz4<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Bill Madden (@maddenifico) May 1, 2026<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The court\u2019s decision drew\u00a0sharp criticism<\/a>\u00a0from Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the lone dissenter<\/strong>. Jackson argued that the court\u2019s ruling \u201chas spawned chaos in the State of Louisiana.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, wrote a concurring opinion that responded to Jackson with equally sharp words<\/strong>, countering that her rhetoric \u201clacks restraint.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

\ud83d\udea8 JUSTICE SAMUEL ALITO HAS HAD IT WITH KETANJI BROWN JACKSON<\/p>\n

Joined by Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, Alito EVISCERATED Jackson for her combative and “insulting” dissent:<\/p>\n

“Instead the dissent offers 2 reasons for its proposed course of action. One is TRIVIAL at best, and\u2026 pic.twitter.com\/u4idr8ALPT<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) May 5, 2026<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In an\u00a0unsigned, one-paragraph order<\/a>, the court explained that, to give the losing party time to ask the justices to reconsider their decision, the Supreme Court\u2019s clerk normally waits 32 days after a decision is issued before sending a copy of the opinion and the judgment to the lower court.<\/p>\n

But, the court wrote, in this case the Black voters defending the map at the center of the dispute \u201chave not expressed any intent to ask this Court to reconsider its judgment.\u201d<\/p>\n

The court issued\u00a0its decision<\/a>\u00a0in\u00a0Louisiana v. Callais<\/em><\/a>\u00a0on Wednesday, April 29. By a vote of 6-3, it invalidated a map adopted by the Louisiana Legislature in 2024, which created two majority-Black districts after two lower courts ruled that an earlier map with just one majority-Black district likely violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which bars racial discrimination in voting.<\/p>\n

Later that day, the \u201cnon-African-American\u201d voters who had challenged the 2024 map came to the Supreme Court,\u00a0asking<\/a>\u00a0the justices to bypass its normal 32-day waiting period and finalize the opinion as soon as possible. The voters told the justices that the Louisiana Legislature was \u201cconsidering pushing back\u201d the deadlines for the state\u2019s congressional primaries to allow them \u201cto occur under a remedial map.\u201d Finalizing the opinion immediately, they argued, could give the state more breathing room in which to operate, given the short timeframe in which the state would need to revise the map.<\/strong><\/p>\n

One day later, Louisiana\u00a0told the court<\/a>\u00a0that it would indeed postpone the state\u2019s primary elections for Congress, which had been scheduled for May 16. In the view of Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry, a Republican, the use of the 2024 map would constitute the kind of emergency that justifies a postponement under Louisiana law, because \u201celecting members to Congress under an unconstitutional map flies in the face of the United States Constitution and subjects Louisiana voters to representatives that are impermissibly elected as determined by the United States Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision.\u201d<\/p>\n

In her\u00a0four-page dissent<\/a>, Jackson suggested that the court itself was taking sides in the battle over redistricting. She wrote that developments in the wake of last week\u2019s ruling in\u00a0Callais<\/em>\u00a0\u201chave a strong political undercurrent.\u201d<\/strong> Louisiana\u2019s effort to redistrict, she said, \u201cunfolds in the midst of an ongoing statewide election, against the backdrop of a pitched redistricting battle among state governments that appear to be acting as proxies for their favored political parties.\u201d<\/p>\n

Moreover, Jackson noted, in the last 25 years, when one litigant has objected to a request to fast-track the issuance of its final opinion, the court has only granted the request twice. \u201cTo avoid the appearance of partiality,\u201d she emphasized, \u201cwe could \u2026 opt to stay on the sidelines and take no position by applying our default procedures.\u201d But by granting the challengers\u2019 request, she said, the court\u2019s action \u201cis tantamount to an approval of Louisiana\u2019s rush to pause the ongoing election in order to pass a new map.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

In a\u00a0five-paragraph concurring opinion<\/a>, Alito called Jackson\u2019s suggestion that the court should allow the 32-day waiting period to expire \u201cto \u2018avoid the appearance of partiality\u2019\u201d \u201cbaseless and insulting.\u201d <\/strong>Complying with the waiting period, Alito posited, could itself be construed as partisan, because it would favor the defenders of the 2024 map. Alito also pushed back against Jackson\u2019s contention \u201cthat our decision represents an unprincipled use of power,\u201d calling it a \u201cgroundless and utterly irresponsible charge.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Louisiana Legislature\u00a0plans to hear public comments<\/a>\u00a0on Friday on a new proposed map, which would include one majority-Black district. Meanwhile,\u00a0lawsuits have been filed<\/a>\u00a0in both federal and state courts in Louisiana, challenging Landry\u2019s postponement of the May 16 primary.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Tyler Durden<\/a><\/span>
\nTue, 05\/05\/2026 – 11:30<\/span><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Alito Punches Back After Ketanji Insult Following SCOTUS Decision On Voting Rights Authored by Amy Howe via scotusblog.com, The Supreme Court on Monday night\u00a0granted a request\u00a0to immediately finalize its opinion in\u00a0Louisiana v. Callais, in which it struck down that state\u2019s congressional map, to allow Louisiana to draw a new map in time for the 2026… Continue reading Alito Punches Back After Ketanji Insult Following SCOTUS Decision On Voting Rights<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":596627,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"rop_custom_images_group":[],"rop_custom_messages_group":[],"rop_publish_now":"initial","rop_publish_now_accounts":[],"rop_publish_now_history":[],"rop_publish_now_status":"pending","footnotes":""},"categories":[18,19,10,21,12,11,9],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-596637","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-cancel-culture","category-censorship","category-civil-liberties","category-election-integrity","category-equal-justice","category-free-speech","category-religious-freedom","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/596637","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=596637"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/596637\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/596627"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=596637"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=596637"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/buglecall.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=596637"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}