Elections, Courts and the Judiciary

Subterms

    Latest story

    125 Shares104 Views

    A Reckless Judicial Nomination Puts the Senate to the Test

    by

    Republicans in the Senate may be on the verge of their most consequential capitulation to President Trump so far — and I am not talking about the deficit-busting “big, beautiful bill.”On Wednesday, when the eyes of the nation were still fixed on the Middle East, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on Trump’s nomination of Emil Bove to serve as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which covers cases from Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware and the Virgin Islands.Bove’s nomination is yet another sign that Trump’s second term is beginning (yes, it’s still only the beginning) very differently from his first. Just as he wants sycophants and yes men staffing his administration, he’s now moving toward staffing the judiciary with the same kind of person: judges who will do whatever it takes to curry favor with a president who values fealty above all.By now, Americans are accustomed to the devolution of Trump’s team. Serious people populated the highest levels of the executive branch at the start of Trump’s first term, but now some of the most important positions in American government are held by cranks like Kash Patel, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Pete Hegseth.But as bad as those men are, their influence is ultimately limited — first by Trump himself, who feels completely free to overrule and disregard any decision they make for the sake of his own interests and whims, and second by time itself. Trump’s political appointees won’t be in American government for long, and while they can inflict lasting damage during their short tenures, the next president can replace them and at least start the process of repair.Emil Bove, however, would be a problem for a very long time. At 44 years old, he’s been nominated for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench. That means he’d long outlast Trump in the halls of American power, and if past performance is any measure of future results, we should prepare for a judge who would do what he deems necessary to accomplish his political objectives — law and morality be damned.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 125 Shares91 Views

      in Elections

      How Hugo Aguilar Ortiz Became Mexico’s Most Powerful Indigenous Lawyer

      by

      In the far-flung hamlet in southern Mexico where he grew up, Hugo Aguilar Ortiz’s boyhood job was to herd goats. Nearly everyone around him on the mist-shrouded slopes of Oaxaca persisted in speaking Tu’un Savi, known as the language of the rain, even centuries after the Spanish conquest.“I thought the world ended at the mountains,” said Mr. Aguilar Ortiz, now 52 and the newly elected chief justice of Mexico’s Supreme Court. “I never thought about becoming a lawyer.”Dealing a jolt to Mexico’s legal establishment, he won his seat in the country’s first judicial elections, part of a sweeping redesign of the judiciary by the leftist governing party, Morena. It rewrote the Constitution to let voters directly elect thousands of judges around Mexico, ending the previous appointment-based system.Feuding over the judicial overhaul has consumed Mexico for the past year. Critics say it erodes the last major check on the power of President Claudia Sheinbaum’s party, which already controls the executive branch, both houses of Congress and most statehouses across Mexico.But Morena’s supporters contend that the changes were needed not only to root out the judicial system’s corruption and nepotism, but also to make judgeships attainable to those traditionally excluded from positions of power. Mr. Aguilar Ortiz’s metamorphosis from goatherd to chief justice bolsters such ambitions.“Things can change now that we have Hugo there,” said Alejandro Marreros Lobato, a Nahua human rights activist, who drew on Mr. Aguilar Ortiz’s support in a legal battle against a Canadian open-pit mining project near his Nahua community. “It makes me feel that we can finally start talking about justice.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Mexico Votes in Sprawling, First-Ever Judiciary Election

      by

      Voters were choosing the nine members of the Supreme Court on Sunday, along with more than 2,600 other judges and magistrates.Voters across Mexico went to the polls on Sunday to elect thousands of judges, from the local level to the Supreme Court, pressing ahead with one of the most far-reaching judicial overhauls ever attempted by a large democracy.The process will transform the judiciary away from an appointment-based system, a change that leaders of the governing Morena party say will help root out corrupt officials, democratize the courts and give citizens a voice in who administers justice.But although most Mexicans agree that their justice system is broken, the overhaul being enacted on Sunday has drawn sharp criticism from opposition figures and legal experts. They argue that it risks giving Morena extraordinary power over a third branch of government, throws out the old system’s career requirements and opens the door to candidates who could be influenced by drug cartels.Because the election is so ambitious — more than 2,600 judges and magistrates will be elected, out of more than 7,700 candidates — some election experts expected voter turnout to be low. As voting got underway, relatively few voters could be seen lining up to vote around the country.In Tultitlán, in the state of Mexico, Jazmín Gutiérrez Ruiz, 37, was among those who cast ballots. She said that she hoped the election would root out corruption from the judiciary, and that her reasons were personal. Two of her brothers have spent two years in prison, accused of a murder “they didn’t do,” she said.“I want the magistrates and judges to change, and for them to take the time to carefully look at the cases,” said Ms. Gutiérrez Ruiz, who works for a processed meat company. “Just like my brothers, there are many people locked up unjustly.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      México vota en las primeras elecciones del poder judicial en su historia

      by

      Los mexicanos eligieron el domingo a los nueve miembros de la Suprema Corte, junto con más de 2600 jueces y magistrados.Los votantes de todo México acudieron a las urnas el domingo para elegir a miles de jueces, desde los tribunales locales hasta la Suprema Corte, impulsando una de las modificaciones judiciales de mayor alcance jamás intentadas por una democracia grande.El proceso transformará el sistema judicial, que dejará de estar basado en nombramientos, un cambio que, según los líderes del partido gobernante, Morena, ayudará a erradicar a los funcionarios corruptos, democratizar los tribunales y dar voz a los ciudadanos para decidir quién imparte la justicia.Sin embargo, aunque la mayoría de los mexicanos concuerdan en que su sistema de justicia es deficiente, la modificación que entra el vigor el domingo ha suscitado duras críticas por parte de figuras de la oposición y expertos jurídicos. Argumentan que se corre el riesgo de otorgar a Morena un poder extraordinario sobre el tercer poder del gobierno, que elimina los requisitos de carrera del antiguo sistema y que abre la puerta a candidatos que podrían estar influenciados por los cárteles de la droga.Dado que las elecciones son tan ambiciosas —se elegirán más de 2600 jueces y magistrados, de entre más de 7700 candidatos—, algunos expertos electorales esperaban que la participación fuera baja. A medida que se iniciaba la votación, se podían ver relativamente pocas personas haciendo fila para votar en todo el país.En Tultitlán, en el Estado de México, Jazmín Gutiérrez Ruiz, de 37 años, se encontraba entre quienes emitieron su voto. Dijo que esperaba que las elecciones erradicaran la corrupción del poder judicial, y que sus motivos eran personales. Dos de sus hermanos han pasado dos años en prisión, acusados de un asesinato “que ellos no hicieron”, dijo.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      What to Know About the Legal Battle Over a North Carolina Supreme Court Race

      by

      The Republican challenger has embarked on an extraordinary effort to reverse his election loss that critics say is testing the boundaries of post-election litigation.In North Carolina, the Republican candidate for a State Supreme Court seat has refused to concede to the Democratic incumbent, even though two recounts by a state elections board confirmed that he lost the November election by a few hundred votes.The Republican challenger, Judge Jefferson Griffin, who currently sits on the North Carolina Court of Appeals, has instead embarked on an extraordinary monthslong effort to toss out scores of ballots. The race is the last in the nation to be uncertified.Judge Griffin’s challenge has ping-ponged through federal and state courts. The Democratic incumbent, Justice Allison Riggs, appealed a recent State Supreme Court decision that could lead to thousands of military and overseas ballots being tossed. On Tuesday, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit temporarily blocked the ballot verification process that had been ordered by the State Supreme Court. Many of the ballots in question come from Democratic-leaning counties, so their removal could lead to the election being overturned.As the case continues through the court system, Judge Griffin and the North Carolina Republican Party have drawn criticism from democracy watchdog groups, liberals and even some conservatives who worry about a dangerous precedent being set for future elections.Here’s what to know about the case.What happened after the November election?Justice Riggs was declared the winner of the State Supreme Court race by 734 votes, an unusually small margin. Judge Griffin sought to verify that margin by requesting recounts. After the State Board of Elections reaffirmed Justice Riggs’s victory twice, Judge Griffin filed a protest with the board, which has a Democratic majority.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Susan Crawford Wins Wisconsin Supreme Court Election, Despite Elon Musk’s Millions

      by

      Susan Crawford defeated Brad Schimel for a State Supreme Court seat in a race that shattered spending records and maintained a liberal majority on the court.Susan Crawford, the liberal candidate for a pivotal seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, overcame $25 million in spending from Elon Musk and defeated her conservative opponent, The Associated Press reported, in a totemic contest that became a critical test of the nation’s prevailing political winds.Judge Crawford, who serves in Dane County, handily defeated Judge Brad Schimel of Waukesha County, who ran on his loyalty to President Trump and was powered by record spending in the race from Mr. Musk, the president’s billionaire policy aide. The barrage of spending in the race may nearly double the previous record for a single judicial election. With over 70 percent of the vote counted on Tuesday evening, Judge Crawford held a lead of roughly 10 points.“Today, Wisconsinites fended off an unprecedented attack on our democracy, our fair elections and our Supreme Court,” she said in her victory speech on Tuesday night. “Wisconsin stood up and said loudly that justice does not have a price. Our courts are not for sale.”For Democrats, the result is a jolt of momentum. They have been engaged in a coast-to-coast rhetorical rending of garments since Mr. Trump returned to the White House in January and embarked with Mr. Musk on an effort to drastically shrink federal agencies, set aside international alliances and alter the government’s relationships with the nation’s universities, minority groups, immigrants and corporate world.Coming on the heels of Democratic triumphs in special elections for state legislative seats in Iowa and Pennsylvania and the defeat of four Republican-backed state referendums in Louisiana, Judge Crawford’s victory puts the party on its front foot for the first time since last November. Her win showed that, at least in one instance, Mr. Musk’s seemingly endless reserves of political cash had energized more Democrats than Republicans.The victory for Judge Crawford maintains a 4-to-3 majority for liberals on the court, which in coming months is poised to deliver key decisions on abortion and labor rights.Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Crucial Week for Trump: New Tariffs and Elections Will Test His Momentum

      by

      Down-ballot races in Florida and Wisconsin are seen as a referendum on the White House, while the president’s to-be-announced reciprocal tariff plan is increasingly worrying investors and consumers.President Trump’s political momentum will face a major test this week as Democrats try to turn various down-ballot races into a referendum on the White House, and Mr. Trump’s long-promised tariffs risk rattling allies and consumers alike.A State Supreme Court election in Wisconsin on Tuesday is seen as an indicator of support for Mr. Trump, particularly after Elon Musk and groups he funds spent more than $20 million to bolster Mr. Trump’s preferred candidate. White House officials have also been increasingly concerned with the unusually competitive race on Tuesday for a deep-red House seat in Florida left vacant after Representative Michael Waltz stepped down to serve as Mr. Trump’s national security adviser.The White House is hoping victories in those races will tighten Mr. Trump’s grip on the Republican Party as his team seeks to overcome the backlash from its inadvertent sharing of military plans on a commercial app with a journalist.The Florida election is critical for Republicans, who hold a narrow majority in the House as they try to pass the president’s agenda. The outcome of the Wisconsin race, in a battleground state that Mr. Trump narrowly won last year, could be a reflection of voters’ views on the president’s gutting of the federal work force, his crackdown on illegal immigration and his moves to purge diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.“It’s a big race,” Mr. Trump said of the Wisconsin judicial contest on Monday while signing executive orders in the Oval Office. “Wisconsin is a big state politically, and the Supreme Court has a lot to do with elections in Wisconsin.”Mr. Trump is also expected to reveal the details of his reciprocal tariff plan on Wednesday. He has labeled it “Liberation Day,” saying the nation will finally break free of past trade relationships that he argues have cheated the United States. Investors, however, are growing more concerned that the tariffs could fuel inflation and slow consumer spending, potentially driving up economic anxieties among voters.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 175 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      A Musk Lawsuit in Wisconsin Is the Backdrop to the State’s Supreme Court Race

      by

      A legal battle over Tesla sales in Wisconsin is the quiet backdrop to a big State Supreme Court race.I was driving from Eau Claire, Wis., to Minneapolis last week when I saw the sign.A Tesla sign.Soon after I crossed the St. Croix River, which divides Wisconsin and Minnesota, a brick-and-steel tower visible from Interstate 94 advertised the Tesla store and service center in Lake Elmo, Minn.The dealership’s proximity to the state line is probably no accident: Wisconsin law prohibits vehicle manufacturers from selling cars directly to customers there, the way Tesla usually does. Instead, companies need to work through local franchisees — think Hank’s Ford or Jimmy’s Subaru, that sort of thing.This means that, in Wisconsin, you can’t actually stroll into a dealership and leave with a Tesla. You can look at one — the company has showrooms in Madison and Milwaukee — but if you want one, you’ll generally have to buy it online and pick it up somewhere like Lake Elmo or Northern Illinois, or have it delivered.Tesla sued Wisconsin over this law in January. Now, Tesla’s owner, Elon Musk, is spending big money on the state’s Supreme Court race.The lawsuit has become a major focus for Democrats, who are accusing Musk of trying to buy a justice and swing the very court that might at some point consider his lawsuit. My colleagues Reid Epstein, who writes about national politics, and Neal Boudette, who covers the auto industry, teamed up to explore the relationship between the lawsuit and Musk’s $20 million investment — so far — in the judicial election, which will be held on April 1.The politics of Tesla’s fight with Wisconsin are, like so much involving Musk, kind of topsy-turvy. It pits car dealers, who tend to be Republican, against Musk supporters, who these days also tend to be Republican.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Why Elon Musk and Tesla Have a Legal Bone to Pick With Wisconsin

      by

      As the billionaire and his allied groups pour more than $20 million into a race for the state’s top court, his car company is suing Wisconsin over a law restricting vehicle sales.Elon Musk is far and away the biggest spender in this year’s race for the Wisconsin Supreme Court, throwing his fortune behind a conservative candidate aiming to topple the court’s 4-to-3 liberal majority.The deluge of cash — $20 million and counting from Mr. Musk and groups tied to him — comes as his electric car company, Tesla, is suing Wisconsin over its law prohibiting vehicle manufacturers from selling cars directly to consumers. The law requires a franchisee to act as a middleman.Tesla filed the lawsuit in January, days before Mr. Musk began spending on the race. He has not publicly mentioned the litigation, but for weeks it has served as a backdrop of the April 1 election. The case is now before a court in Milwaukee County, but it could proceed to the Wisconsin Supreme Court in the coming months.The conservative candidate, Brad Schimel, a Waukesha County judge who has declined to discuss the Tesla case, appeared with Mr. Musk on a social media livestream on Saturday and drew President Trump’s endorsement late last week. He faces Susan Crawford, a liberal Dane County judge backed by Wisconsin Democrats.Since Mr. Musk began spending to help Judge Schimel, Judge Crawford and Wisconsin Democrats have built their public messaging around the idea that she is in a battle with the billionaire leading Mr. Trump’s destruction of the federal government.“It is no coincidence that Elon Musk started spending that money within days of Tesla filing a lawsuit in Wisconsin,” Judge Crawford said during a televised debate this month.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More