Michael Popak (47:41)
Yeah, I'd love to get Robby Kaplan, the lawyer for aging Carroll, back on the show. She's been with us a number of times. I'll reach out to her so she can brief her audience when the timing's right. I'm sure, I'm sure she will. She may wait to see the petition before she comes on, but we will get Robbie back on, which will be a very unique perspective about what's going on and what her feelings are about the merits of the appeal. In fact, I'll make a note to do it tonight when we're done with tonight's live show to reach out to her so we have that. When we come back from our last break, we'll talk about the Supreme Court again in the context of voting and congressional maps. And they're playing fast and loose with purported constitutional principles that, as Ketanji Brown Jackson laid out, seem to have yielded to raw exercise of power by the Supreme Court. And by that, she means the fact that the ma, the right wing, have six votes and they're going to shove many, many things down our throats and up our bodies that we're not comfortable with. And we'll cover all of that, bring everybody up to speed so they know when we talk about maps in shorthand, voting in shorthands and Supreme Court rulings like Calais, you know what we're talking about. And you can use it in your own, you know, to reach your own conclusions and to bring it into the marketplace of ideas in your own life and social media with friends and around the kitchen table and all of that. Just important, important things that we need to talk about. We'll do that. But first we'll take our last break, support the show that's really important, keeps us on the air you have for the last six years and we appreciate that. Subscribe to our show on and follow it on on Spotify and on Apple here. Let people know about it. Invite them to come join our show tonight or Saturday night with with Ben Meisellus. And then We've got legal AF YouTube channel for those who just can't get enough and want to have 12 videos a day dedicated to law and politics. I joke. It's like a TED talk in a law school had a baby and you were there for it. So join us and you can subscribe. Become a member there. That's another way to support. And then we've got Legal AF substack. Yeah, there it is. Where we got live reports. Real live live like like now but in a different way. You know, jump on at lunch, talk about issues at, at the, at the days. Mid. At the. Mid. At the midday. Sorry. And then legal filings and orders and opinions can read them for yourself on Legal a F substack. And now a word from our curated sponsors. Be honest, have you ever actually looked at the ingredient list on your dog's food after the first ingredient? Well, good luck. You see, kibble is made using extreme high heat to keep its shelf stable and inexpensive. So brands have to add back synthetic vitamins and minerals in the form of strange chemicals whose names you don't understand and definitely cannot pronounce. Is that really what you want? Your dog eating sundaes for dogs is different. They start with 80% plus all natural meats and then finish with superfoods like kale, ginger and blueberries and gently air dries them instead of using high heat. Sundaes doesn't look or smell like dog food. It looks like high quality human grade jerky. No fillers, no nutritional blends, no chemicals, just simple complete nutrition. Founded by Dr. Tori Waxman, Sundaes was created to meet her high standards as a veterinarian and as a dog parent. And the best part, Sundays requires no fridge, no freezer, no prep, no mess. You get the quality of a home cooked meal with the scoop and serve. Ease of kibble. It's what dog food should have been all along. Over 100,000 dogs are eating Sundays and the reviews speak for themselves, especially from owners of picky eaters who had never seen their dog get this excited about mealtime before make the switch to Sundays. Go right now to Sundays for dogs.com legalif50 and get 50% off your first order. Or you can use code legal af50 at checkout. That's 50% off your first order at sundays4dogs.com legal a50 Sundays for dogs.com legal a50 use code legal af50 at checkout. This episode is brought to you by IQ Bar, our exclusive snack, hydration and coffee sponsor. IQ Bar protein bars IQ mix hydration mixes IQ Joe mushroom coffees are the delicious, low sugar, brain and body fuel you need to win your day. The Ultimate Sampler Pack. It's a great way to try all IQ Bar products and flavors. You get nine IQ Bars, eight IQ Mix Sticks and four IQ Joe Sticks. All IQ Bar products are clean, label, certified and entirely free from gluten, dairy, soy, GMOs and artificial ingredients. IQ Bars plant protein Bars are the smarter snack choice with plenty of plant protein, tons of fiber and no added Sugar. With over 20,000 5 star reviews and counting, more people than ever are fueling their busy lifestyles with IQ Bars, Brain and Body Boosting Bars, Hydration Mixes and Mushroom Coffees. Their Ultimate Sampler Pack includes all three IQ Bar has become part of my daily routine, whether it's starting my morning with IQ Joe or grabbing an IQ Bar when I need a quick clean snack. And right now, IQ Bar is offering our special podcast listeners 20% off all IQ Bar products, including the Ultimate Sampler Pack, plus free shipping. To get your 20% off, text legal AF to 65 text legal AF to 64,000. That's legal AF to 64,000. Message and data rates may apply. See terms for details. Welcome back to Legal AF at the midweek so, Karen, we covered this, but I want to get your view. We get the Calais decision. Turns out from Democracy docket that Bernie Calay is an election denier of the first order. He's. He's the non white, sorry, the non black voter that had a problem with Louisiana adding one more black congressional district and challenged it under the 15th amendment and the Voting Rights Act. It's now known as the Calais Decision and issued by the Supreme Court last week. We've been wringing our hands over it, figuring out what the silver lining is. There probably is one. I mean, it's mainly the dummy mandering of the Republicans over mapping and over districting to try to try to obtain a Republican advantage at a time when they've miscalculated about where the political will is and where the political winds are blowing since there's been such a tremendous change and rejection of the Trump administration in the last 16 months. I mean, mapping sounded like a good idea when Donald Trump's approval rating was in the 40s. It's a terrible idea as it heads for the 20s and as Hispanics and Hispanic Catholics and women and voters under 30 and black and others, independents, all run screaming from the House of Trump. And it's that missed change in demographics which could lead not to remapping, giving the Republicans an advantage, but making unstable and insecure a number of those districts so that the Republicans get less, not more. You know, it's the law of unintended consequences. I was on with Mark Elias yesterday from democracy docket and first rate voting and map litigator who's involved with about 70 cases right now. And he and I both agreed that just because you redraw the map in Texas to give yourself five more doesn't mean you're going to get the five. You can probably not. You're probably going to get one, maybe you get two. But where the Democrats did their vote change, their seat changes, it's like rock solid because they did it the right way. They went to have the voters vote on ballot initiatives and proposals and referendums. So California's plus five, you can take that to the bank. That was Mark's comment. You know, Florida's another four or five. I don't know about that. Virginia. Virginia voters voted on it 10 to 1 advantage to the virgin to the Democrats. So be careful what you wish for because you might get the opposite. Less seats, not more. So we're banking on a little bit of dummy mandering, but we've lost the Supreme Court as any type of protector of voting rights. And that led to a very interesting what should have been a straightforward rejection of a request became The Supreme Court's MAGA 6, sacrificing their principles, whatever's left of them, in order to enter the fray of a political dispute, which they've always said is wrong under the political question doctrine or untimely under the Purcell doctrine. We'll talk about those doctrines. But here, because it's Republicans that they're benefiting, they're like, where can we put our big fat thumb on the scale? Oh, over here, Louisiana and Democrat and Republicans, let's do it. But when they don't want to do it, like when a minority voting rights are at issue, then it's like, oh, we're a Supreme Court. We can't get involved with politics, we can't get involved with primaries, we can't get involved with voting that way or it's too close to an election, we can't get involved. That violates the political doctrine, except when it doesn't. And so Louisiana asked the court to shorten the 30 do the 32 day window on the Supreme Court rule to have an A decision opinion recognized or rendered to speed it up. And Katanji Brown Jackson pointed out that in 25 years they've only done it twice. But here Alito, writing for the majority, shortens the time to a day enters the fray in Louisiana where there is active litigation being led by the ACLU and Mark Elias, about 80,000 voters who have already voted in the primary based on the maps that were already in place that now they want to toss. And yet the Supreme Court weighs in which led. I'll turn it over to you, Karen. It led to this fight broke out in the open, not that civil between Alito and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Take it from there.