cover of episode Fifth Circuit Election Madness, a Post-Mortem on Roe, & the War on Drugs

Fifth Circuit Election Madness, a Post-Mortem on Roe, & the War on Drugs

2024/10/28
logo of podcast Strict Scrutiny

Strict Scrutiny
AI Deep Dive AI Insights AI Chapters Transcript
People
E
Elizabeth Diaz
K
Kate
L
Leah
L
Lisa Lerer
Topics
Kate 和 Leah：第五巡回法院的裁决试图通过限制选举日后收到邮寄选票的计算来破坏美国的民主制度。这一裁决是荒谬的，它会彻底改变选举方式，并且显示了一种熟悉的模式：法官们声称发现了其他人从未发现的真理。为了得出结论，他们放弃了文本主义。这一裁决实际上损害了数千万美国人的民主权利，但由于法院将案件发回地方法院，作者对地方法院会阻止这一裁决生效持乐观态度。他们认为，即使地方法院没有阻止，最高法院也不会允许在选举临近时推翻选举规则。第五巡回法院的意见以国会拥有广泛的选举监管权为由开始分析，这与之前在《谢尔比县诉霍尔德案》中的立场相矛盾。他们提出了荒谬的假设来说明为什么选票只有在收到后才有效，并专注于“完成”的概念。作者认为各州应该承认并保护在选举日之前投递但在选举日之后收到的选票的有效性。他们还推测，第五巡回法院的克制可能是因为他们不确定此举的党派收益。第五巡回法院中的两位法官可能是特朗普第二任政府的最高法院提名人，他们试图通过法院干预选举。 Elizabeth Diaz 和 Lisa Lerer：她们合作写书是因为对罗诉韦德案被推翻感到震惊。她们从2012年开始讲述故事，因为那时反堕胎运动的步伐开始加快。2012年是反堕胎运动的低谷，也是共和党试图将堕胎问题边缘化的时刻。反堕胎运动拥有一个复杂的网络，在各个层面运作，特朗普当选为他们创造了新的机会。他们制定了一个诉讼策略，利用立法来影响法院的裁决。右翼利用法律和政治手段来改变堕胎的文化，法律可以用来强制改变文化。几十年来，大多数人都支持某种形式的堕胎权，但一个积极参与的反堕胎少数派能够获得法律和政治权力。茶党运动、反堕胎运动和川普运动是相互关联的，茶党运动通过推动堕胎限制为后来的重大变化奠定了基础。推动堕胎限制比削减政府开支更容易。茶党运动中的许多人是虔诚的保守派基督徒。1月6日事件中的抗议者与长期在堕胎诊所抗议的宗教保守派相同。作者将堕胎问题与1月6日事件联系起来，认为堕胎权的斗争不仅关乎堕胎，还关乎保守派基督教在美国生活中的地位。这场斗争是关于保守派基督教在美国生活中的地位。重大社会变革可以通过多种方式发生，包括通过法院进行的看似合法的变革。左翼对罗诉韦德案被推翻感到难以置信，没有认真对待罗诉韦德案面临的威胁，堕胎权问题在政治上对民主党来说并非总是至关重要。现在，堕胎权问题已成为一个重要的政治问题，但民主党恢复堕胎权的承诺面临挑战。即使在州一级有关于生殖自由的宪法修正案，联邦政府仍然可能采取行动限制堕胎。 David Pozen：宪法在毒品战争中扮演着多重角色，被告试图利用宪法作为盾牌，但当法院最终驳回这些请求时，他们是在使政府政策合法化，并在这些政策是否会得到广泛支持尚不明确的时候巩固这些政策。另一方面，宪法在某些时候变成了攻击相对温和的毒品政策的武器。商业广告和《受控物质法案》是两个例子。宪法既未能保护人们免受过于严厉的毒品政策的侵害，又攻击了旨在消除毒品战争某些危害的相对温和、合理的改革。宪法可以发挥更积极、破坏性更小的作用，可以通过多种方式挑战严厉的毒品法律，例如第八修正案和对幸福追求权的保护。但原教旨主义的保守倾向以及法院对原教旨主义主张的选择性应用，使得作者对罗伯茨法院会接受任何毒品权利原教旨主义主张并不乐观。罗宾逊案对毒品政策的影响有限，但它仍然是希望的潜在来源。法院对毒品权利主张的驳回也与社会运动的解释有关，毒品使用者不是一个容易被法院识别为需要特殊保护的群体。精英阶层免受毒品战争最严重的破坏，而其他更弱势的群体则受到其残酷惩罚的制裁。宪法可以发挥作用，例如巩固政策成果，防止倒退，以及在州一级法院挑战严厉的毒品法律。行政部门在制定毒品政策时，没有考虑到宪法价值观，也没有考虑到人们从毒品中获得的益处。

Deep Dive

Key Insights

Why did the Fifth Circuit's decision on mail-in ballots receive criticism?

The Fifth Circuit interpreted century-old federal law to preempt state laws allowing ballots to be counted if postmarked by Election Day, which was previously unrecognized.

Why did the Fifth Circuit send the case back to the district court?

The Fifth Circuit did not put the Mississippi law on hold but sent the case back to determine the remedy, including whether any injunction would go into effect.

Why did the Fifth Circuit's decision on mail-in ballots not go into immediate effect?

The district court had previously upheld the state law, and the Fifth Circuit's decision was sent back to this court, which seemed to understand the law better.

Why did the authors of 'The Fall of Roe' start their story in 2012?

They started in 2012 because it was a pivotal moment when the anti-abortion movement thought all hope was lost, and it marked the beginning of a decade where the pace of change accelerated.

How did the anti-abortion movement prepare for the potential overturning of Roe v. Wade?

They developed a sophisticated network with grassroots organizers, lobbyists, state legislatures, and judges in key positions, and were prepared when Trump was elected.

Why did the left underestimate the threat to Roe v. Wade?

The left underestimated the threat because Roe was foundational to two generations and seemed untouchable, leading to a sense of denial among Democratic politicians and voters.

How does the book 'The Constitution of the War on Drugs' address the absence of constitutional arguments in drug policy debates?

The book explores why the Constitution is rarely enlisted in drug reform efforts despite its relevance to issues of racial equality, individual liberty, and criminal punishment.

Why did constitutional arguments for drug use fail in the 1970s?

Arguments failed because courts required proving a liberty interest as fundamental, which judges were unwilling to do for drug use, and the political climate shifted against drug liberalization.

How does the First Amendment complicate drug law reform?

The First Amendment protects commercial speech, making it difficult to restrict advertising of legal drugs, which can lead to over-marketing and problematic distribution.

Why does the author suggest the Constitution has both failed to protect and affirmatively legitimated the war on drugs?

The Constitution failed to stop harsh drug policies and was used to attack modest reforms, entrenching punitive policies and allowing aggressive enforcement tactics.

Chapters
The hosts discuss the Fifth Circuit's controversial decision on mail-in ballots, which they see as an attempt to undermine democracy. They analyze the case of RNC v. Wetzel and the implications of the ruling on upcoming elections.
  • The Fifth Circuit ruled that states cannot count ballots that arrive after Election Day, even if they were mailed before.
  • The court's decision was based on a misinterpretation of century-old federal law.
  • The hosts express cautious optimism that the district court may not enforce the ruling during ongoing elections due to the Purcell principle.

Shownotes Transcript

After an emergency intro looking at the Fifth Circuit’s bonkers mail-in ballot decision, the ladies do a deep dive on two books. First, they speak with New York Times correspondents Lisa Lerer and Elizabeth Dias about The Fall of Roe: The Rise of a New America). Then, David Pozen of Columbia Law School joins to talk about The Constitution of the War on Drugs), his book about how the war on drugs influenced the constitutional law we have today.