% YOU VERY MUCH.
% >> THANK YOU.
% >> A HIGHLY-ANTICIPATED U.S.
% SUPREME COURT CASE SET FOR ORAL
% ARGUMENTS NEXT WEEK HAS LEGAL
% EXPERTS SOUNDING THE ALARM ON
% ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR EVERY
% STATE, PERHAPS MOST ESPECIALLY
% INCLUDING WISCONSIN.
% THE HIGH COURT TAKES UP A CASE
% ORIGINATING OUT OF NORTH
% CAROLINA WHERE THAT STATE'S HIGH
% COURT STRUCK DOWN
% REPUBLICAN-DRAWN CONGRESSIONAL
% MAPS CALLING THEM A PARTISAN
% GERRYMANDER.
% REPUBLICANS THEN APPEALED TO THE
% U.S. SUPREME COURT ARGUING STATE
% LEGISLATURES HAVE SOLE AUTHORITY
% TO SET RULES FOR ELECTIONS.
% FORMER WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT
% JUSTICE JANINE GESKE JOINED IN A
% BRIEF CALLING ON THE HIGH COURT
% TO REJECT THIS INDEPENDENT STATE
% LEGISLATURE THEORY.
% SHE JOINS US NOW.
% THANKS VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE.
% >> MY PLEASURE.
% >> SO WHY ARE YOU SOUNDING THE
% ALARM ON THIS?
% >> I THINK -- FIRST I THINK IT'S
% UNDER THE RADAR FOR PEOPLE TO
% UNDERSTAND THE COURT IS
% CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THERE
% WILL BE NO STATE COURT REVIEW OF
% ANY ACTIONS BY LEGISLATURES ON
% CONGRESSIONAL RACES.
% SO HOW THE ELECTION RULES ARE
% SET, HOW PEOPLE VOTE, HOW THEY
% ARE COUNTED, AND ULTIMATELY HOW
% THE LINES ARE DRAWN WILL NOT BE
% REVIEWABLE BY STATE COURTS.
% THAT'S PRETTY UNIQUE.
% THE GOVERNOR HAS NO VETO POWER
% OVER IT AND THE COURTS HAVE NO
% REVIEWABILITY, SO I THINK IT IS
% REALLY IMPORTANT.
% REALLY TAKING AWAY THE VOICE OF
% THE PEOPLE THROUGH THE
% INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY AND HAVING
% LEGISLATURES MAKE THE FINAL CALL
% ON THIS.
% IN NORTH CAROLINA THE COURT HELD
% THAT IT VIOLATED, WHAT THE
% LEGISLATURE DONE VIOLATED THE
% NORTH CAROLINA CONSTITUTION.
% AND, YOU KNOW, THE U.S. SUPREME
% COURT IS BEING ASKED TO THROW
% THAT UP AND SAY IT'S NOT UP TO
% NORTH CAROLINA COURTS TO DECIDE
% THAT.
% >> SO IN THE CASE OF WISCONSIN
% SHOULD THAT COME TO PASS THAT
% THE HIGH COURT AGREED WITH THE
% NORTH CAROLINA REPUBLICANS,
% WISCONSIN'S OUTSIZED REPUBLICAN
% MAJORITY LEGISLATURE CERTAINLY
% COULD THROW ITS WEIGHT AROUND.
% BUT WOULD IT IN YOUR MIND?
% >> I THINK IT WOULD, YOU KNOW.
% THE REPUBLICAN-LED LEGISLATURE
% HAS BEEN DOING A LOT OF WORK ON
% ELECTIONS AND CHANGING VOTING
% RULES AND, YOU KNOW -- BUT
% FORTUNATELY THERE IS ALWAYS THAT
% REVIEWABILITY OF THE COURT.
% IN SOME CASES, EVEN THOUGH WE
% HAVE A COURT THAT'S DIVIDED,
% SOME CASES HAVE REVERSED SOME OF
% THE THINGS THE LEGISLATURE HAS
% DONE AND SOME HAVE AFFIRMED IT.
% BUT NOT TO HAVE THAT
% REVIEWABILITY WOULD GIVE MORE
% POWER TO THE LEGISLATURE.
% I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT THEY WOULD
% TAKE IT.
% >> SO THIS THEORY WOULD YOU SAY
% IS PUSHED BY EXTREME PARTISANS?
% IT'S EXACTLY WHAT WAS AT PLAY
% WHEN REPUBLICAN FALSE ELECTORS
% IN WISCONSIN TRIED TO TOSS UP
% BIDEN'S SLATE FOR TRUMP
% ELECTORS.%WHERE DO YOU THINK
THE U.S.
% SUPREME COURT WILL GO WITH THIS?
% >> IT'S INTERESTING.
% THERE ARE AT LEAST FOUR
% JUSTICES, THE MORE CONSERVATIVE
% ONES THAT VOICED AN INTEREST IN
% THIS THEORY.
% JOHN ROBERTS HAS AS WELL.
% I DON'T THINK JOHN ROBERTS WILL
% DO SOMETHING TO TAKE POWER AWAY
% FROM THE STATE COURTS.
% THAT'S JUST MY SENSE.
% HE FEELS VERY STRONGLY ABOUT THE
% IMPORTANCE OF THE JUDICIARY AND
% THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE
% JUDICIARY AND THERE IS AN AMICUS
% BRIEF REPRESENTING ALL THE CHIEF
% JUSTICES FROM ALL 50 STATES
% ASKING THE COURT NOT TO ADOPT
% THIS LEGISLATIVE THEORY.
% AND I HAVE -- IT IS A GUT
% FEELING FROM WATCHING JOHN
% ROBERTS THAT HE WON'T GO ALONG
% WITH IT.
% N WHICH CASE THEY WOULDN'T HAVE
% ENOUGH VOTES.
% BUT WE'LL SEE WITH THE ARGUMENT
% NEXT WEEK.
% >> WHAT WILL YOU BE LISTENING
% FOR FROM JUSTICES?
% >> ACTUALLY JOHN ROBERTS.
% THE KINDS OF QUESTIONS HE WILL
% ASK.
% THE CONSERVATIVE ONES INDICATED
% THEY ARE DOING A VERY NARROW AND
% NOT VERY POPULAR READING OF THE
% U.S. CONSTITUTION IN TERMS OF
% CONTROL OF ELECTIONS AND THEY'VE
% WRITTEN ON THAT IN THE PAST.
% I CAN'T IMAGINE ANYBODY ELSE
% WHO, YOU KNOW, THE MORE MODERATE
% OR LIBERAL OR WHATEVER YOU WANT
% TO CALL THEM JUSTICES WOULD GO.
% IT'S UP TO JOHN ROBERTS TO MAKE
% THE CALL, I THINK.
% I'LL BE REAL INTERESTED IN WHAT
% HE IS ASKING THEM.
% IN PARTICULAR WHAT HE IS ASKING
% THE REPUBLICANS WHO HAVE BROUGHT
% THIS SUIT ABOUT TAKING AWAY THE
% POWER OF THE STATE COURTS.
% >> IN THE END, HOW IN YOUR MIND
% WOULD GIVING LEGISLATURES SOLE
% AUTHORITY OVER ELECTIONS THWART
% THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE?
% >> WELL, IT WOULD TAKE -- YOU
% KNOW, IN OUR STATE, WE ELECT AN
% INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY TO BE A
% CHECK AND BALANCE ON OUR
% GOVERNOR AND ON THE LEGISLATURE.
% IT WILL TAKE THAT CHECK AND
% BALANCE AWAY.
% AND THE ONLY ATTACK WOULD BE TO
% A FEDERAL COURT IF A FEDERAL
% COURT WOULD TAKE IT.
% SO IT REALLY DOES TAKE THAT
% INDEPENDENT REVIEW BY THE STATE,
% CONSISTENT WITH THE STATE
% CONSTITUTION OF WHETHER THIS WAS
% A LAWFUL GERRYMANDERED OR
% WHETHER IT'S A LAWFUL RULE.
% I THINK THAT WE'VE SEEN HOW
% IMPORTANT THAT IS OVER THE LAST
% SEVERAL ELECTIONS, WHERE PEOPLE
% ARE ARGUING ABOUT WHETHER
% ELECTIONS ARE VALID OR INVALID
% AND HOW YOU COUNT VOTES AND
% THINGS.%NOT TO HAVE REVIEWAB
ILITY IN THE
% STATE IS VERY DANGEROUS.
% >> FORMER SUPREME COURT JUSTICE