BOMBSHELL: US Supreme Court drops BOMB on Trump

This is Democracy Watch, Mark. We have. got an explosive ruling at the Supreme. Court, a huge blow to Trump at the hands. of you and your law firm. Can you. explain what just happened? >> Yeah, we just won a huge voting case in. the US Supreme Court. This is the Watson. versus Republican National Committee. case. The RNC thought it could undermine. mail-in voting. by going and suing Mississippi. You. know, I'm sure the RNC thought that the. Republican Attorney General of. Mississippi was just the kind of lawyers.

that they'd like to be up against. But. we intervened in this case in the trial. court. We fought it. We fought it. through the Fifth Circuit. And now, in a. 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court agreed. with us and ruled that ballots cast by. mail that are postmarked by election day. can count even if they are received in. the days afterwards. This means that the. laws that are on the books in about 19. states will continue to be on the books. And it means that hundreds of thousands. of voters, and in presidential years,

more than a million voters, will not. have their ballots thrown in the trash. at the hands of Donald Trump and the. Republican Party. That is what they. wanted here. This is part of the broad. scheme that Republicans have to try to. disenfranchise voters and particularly. to disenfranchise people who vote by. mail. And Brian, if everyone who said. there, you know, there's no point in. fighting, that this the courts are. rigged against us, that Mark, you know, it this is all of going to be for.

nothing. I hope all of them are. watching. I hope all of them are not. just apologizing, but they're also. subscribing to this channel and this. series in particular, because Brian, you. can go back and you can see that even in. the face of those naysayers, we fought. hard, we fought in court, and we won. >> And and I should note, look, this is a. huge priority for Trump. He's been. particularly focused on mail-in voting. He passed this uh what we now know as an. illegal executive order to try and. eliminate mail-in voting even though he.

himself uses it. But they've been really. focused on this idea of trying to. prevent any ballots that weren't. received by election day from being. counted. There was also talk of USPS. being able to to to. meddle in. in how fast ballots could be returned so. that if they did arrive after election. day, those wouldn't be counted either. You and your team litigated this case in. court. You were the ones on the front. lines fighting back against Trump on one. of his top priorities and you won this. case in a 6-3 conservative court that so.

often rules against Democrats and is and. is showing blind deference to Trump and. this White House. So a step that. everybody can and should take right now. to support Mark's invaluable work is to. sign up for Democracy Docket. That's the. news outlet Mark founded to focus on. everything voting and elections. It's. how I get my legal news. It's how I get. my voting rights and democracy news. And it's how I found out about this. Supreme Court decision today. So I'm. going to put that link right here on the. screen and also in the post description.

of this video. Support fearless. independent journalism. Support the work. that Mark's team does in the courts. This is the best way to do it. Mark, can. you talk a little bit about why Trump. was so focused on this issue in. particular, this Watson case in. particular? >> Yeah, this has been the centerpiece of. the Republican Party scheme against. mail-in voting for I mean for years. I. mean, you know, I I started Democracy. Docket in 2020 and I wrote about this in. March of 2020 and I mean, I I feel like.

the RNC and I have been tangling on this. issue in court and in public ever since. And the reason why is because they have. figured out that the people whose. mail-in ballot are most likely to be. rejected if you require all ballots to. be received by election day rather than. postmarked by election day. That the. people most likely affected are young. voters because they tend to vote their. ballots later, rather than earlier, relative to older voters,

minority voters, and transient voters. Because the the. postal service delays tend to hit. minority communities often times harder, and transient voters have a harder time. in general with with with getting their. mail. And so, they they looked at this, and they were made no bones about it. I. mean, the RNC claimed standing in this. case because it was injured by ballots. being postmarked by election day.

counting because more Democrats were. were able to take advantage of that. So, they were very up front that. >> that that is a pretty stunning. indictment just unto itself that the. Republicans consider themselves injured. because Democrats Democratic voters had. the right to vote. using a medium where the other party. disproportionately benefited were. disproportionately cast ballots more. than the other one. >> Right. Now, this is going to have a lot. of ripple effects here. I mean, this is. ripping down.

the big one that the RNC has invested. millions and millions of dollars to try. to to to win. And they didn't win it, and that's going to be a huge deal. But, the second thing is, Brian, all the lies. we've heard aimed at California, well, those just kind of like disappeared into. a puddle, legally at least. Because all. of these arguments about, you know, that. you can't count ballots, you know, that. are postmarked by election day that come. in afterwards, which California does,

like Donald Trump has made up an entire. series of lies about this. He has been. lying on Truth Social since this opinion. came down, but this is all now, you. know, going to be a much harder road for. them. >> So, what is next, or what what what's on. the horizon given the fact that the. Republicans lost this Watson case? I. presume that they're not going to. continue to to dig in on this issue. considering it's moot at this point. They've they've lost this issue at the. Supreme Court. So, they can complain.

about it, but at this point they're just. wasting their breath considering even. five justices, two of whom are are are, you know, pretty hardline conservatives, uh ruled against them. And so, what do. you anticipate is going to be the next. frontier now? >> Right. So, I think two things. Number. one, uh Donald Trump's method of of. dealing with uh defeats is to escalate. Right? So, Donald Trump is not going to. back away on this. Donald Trump is now. going to say that there's even more.

fraud than ever, and he uses this as a. permission structure to then um. uh stoke his supporters and potentially. lead to more escalated activity. including violence. We saw that after my. team and I beat Donald Trump more than. 60 times in court after the 2020. election, right? When when he contested. the election, I was representing. President Biden and the Democratic. Party. We went to court, we won, we won. all those cases. But, Donald Trump. didn't end the fight. He just escalated. it to what eventually became January.

6th. So, everyone needs to pay attention. and watch out with these defeats. coupled with the fact that Donald. Trump's Department of Justice is now 0. for 10. I mean, 0 for 10 in cases in. which they are trying to get access to. the voter file records uh that states. have. Coupled with the fact that he has. lost his first big court of appeals case. in those cases. Coupled with the fact. that he uh he uh lost a a big case to. the Democratic Attorneys General on his.

second uh anti-voting executive order. Like, all of these things, you know, are. stewing in the White House, in the Oval. Office, among the Republicans uh who. follow these things. And so, look, you. know, today's a good day. Uh. uh you know, every every victory I I I. cherish. Uh and uh you know, in case hey, Donald. Trump, in case you're listening, I am. not tired of winning at all. Like, we. got a bunch more victories in store uh. at your expense. But but Brian, I do.

worry about like what this means comes. next as he escalates. uh you know, his war of words and then. ultimately tries to incite his. supporters. >> Right. I I think I think actually this. is a perfect instance where he's run out. of legal runway. And uh and at this. point, you know, he can kind of defer to. the other um the other tactics that he's. employed in the past. Um I I do want to. take this opportunity, as we've had a. couple of other uh Supreme Court. decisions handed down, to speak about.

what else uh the Supreme Court did. today. Can you just uh give a quick. overview of those other decisions? >> Yeah, so uh. unfortunately, though not unexpectedly, the Supreme Court in the Slaughter case, this is the. um case involving the effort by Donald. Trump, the successful effort by Donald. Trump now, to fire an a Democratic uh. Federal Trade Commission uh uh. uh. uh member. Uh and uh the Supreme Court. blessed that on a on a 6-3 basis, right?

So, you had the conservatives all saying. that's fine, the liberals uh pointing. out how this is, you know, stripping. Congress of an essential uh feature of. of of Congress's authority, and also. overruling a case that goes all the way. back to FDR, right? The Humphrey's. Executor case, which actually involved. an FTC commissioner. So, it is not It is. not just like indirectly overruling that. precedent, it is it is directly. overruling that precedent. And this has.

been the basis for independent federal. agencies ever since. So, essentially, uh. moving forward, there are no independent. federal agencies. The president has can. appoint, uh, whoever they want, uh, to, uh, regardless of what criteria Congress has. put in place, uh, for partisan balance. They seemingly can do that, except for. the second case, which is the Cook case. This involved, uh, Donald Trump's effort. to fire a Federal Reserve Board member, and there, in a 5-4 decision, the.

Supreme Court said, "No, you you can't. do that." Uh, so, it appears that at. least for now, the rule is that, um, uh, Wall Street wins and everybody else. loses. Uh, the Federal Reserve Board, uh, cannot be, uh, can, you know, is. more protected than the Federal Trade. Commission, right? So, the agency that. protects individual consumers from. fraud, they're not protected. The the. the the entity that makes sure interest. rates are stable and Wall Street is. happy they happy, they are protected.

Now, you know, we may see some. additional skirmishing around some other. independent agencies. I'm particularly. focused on the Federal Election. Commission, for example, which is. statutorily set up to be, uh, uh, no. more than three members of the same. political party, but there are others. that, uh, that we need to keep an eye. on, but this is a a dark day in the. fight for government on the merits. And. Brian, it is also a good time to mention. that you have written an important book. that is getting published, uh, in, uh, a little more than a week,

about what comes next. And, you know, it. very much is on this topic of what. Democrats need to do when they take. power, and I sure as hell hope that. Democrats keep a copy of this Slaughter. opinion close at hand. >> And that's actually what I want to dig. into. I'm I'm I'm also going to put the. the link to pre-order that book, The Day. After, right here on the screen and also. in the post description. Um, definitely. appreciate anybody who wants to support. independent media grabbing, uh, a copy. of that book. >> And it's a great book, by the way. I. wrote the forward. Only book I've ever. written a forward for. Uh, just so.

everyone out there knows. Like, I get. asked, will I put blurbs on books? And. once in a while I will if I if I've read. it and I agree with it. And I get all. asked all the time, will I write a. forward or an introduction? And I. uniformly say no. This is the one. exception to that. I read Brian's. manuscript and I was like, not only. forget blurb, Brian, I want to write the. forward. And he was kind enough to let. me do that. His publisher was kind. enough to let me do that. And they went. a step further. And you know, this. lawsuit that we've been talking about.

today, this case uh in the Supreme Court. that we just won, it was supported by. something called the Free Election Fund, okay? It is That is the entity that. essentially finances and funds the. ability for these pro-voting cases. And. Brian and his editor and his publisher, I don't know what he did to get his. editor on board, they've agreed to. donate a portion of the proceeds of this. book to the Free Election Fund to help. support the kinds of litigation that. we're doing this very episode on. So, please make sure you buy that book.

>> Well, I appreciate that. And look, um in. terms of donating proceeds from every. book sold to the Free Election Fund, the. result that we're seeing here in this. Watson case is exactly why uh the Free. Election Fund should be uh supported and. and financed. And so, I'm I'm more than. happy to do that. And to that end, Mark, uh you know, people are going to look at the victory. here and say uh the the the thesis of. this book really is that is that um. Democrats need to to learn how to wield. power if and when we get power back. And.

and you and I have obviously and. everybody watching are doing everything. they can to ensure that that happens. But they're going to look at this. victory and say, you know, big swings here are not going to be. necessary. Court reform, something I. speak about at length in the book, are. not going to be necessary because look, this is the system working as it should. The Watson case uh that you won that you. and your team litigated and and won is a. testament to the the that the court uh. can actually work. and so we don't need. these reforms and so what would be your.

reaction to that? >> Absolutely not. We need these reforms. We need to do the things that Brian said. in this book. We need to take big. swings. Look, here's the thing. We won this case and I am thrilled by. that. You can tell. This was a big one. for democracy. If we had lost this case, hundreds of thousands of voters would. have been disenfranchised. So I am. thrilled that we won this case. But you know, I also pointed out. other other cases that we got from the. Supreme Court that have been devastating. for democracy. I mean, you know, we.

talked about the slaughter case, but but. let's not forget this is the same court. that that that ruled in Klay and gutted. section two of the Voting Rights Act and. we saw all of the devastation that it. that that had throughout the country. They have already indicated that they. are going to take another voting case. next term. It's actually a case that my. team and I won in the in Arizona and in. the ninth circuit involving documentary. proof of citizenship and and removal of. voters from the rolls. This was an. important victory. The Supreme Court's. taken that case for next term. This is.

also a case that the RNC has asked them. to take. And so look, we need court. reform. We need to make sure that when. Democrats take control, they read. opinions like slaughter not so that they. can unilaterally disarm, but that they. are putting in place a government of. people who are going to be pro-democracy. and are going to implement both the. procedural, but also the substantive. policies that this country needs. So now.

is not a time to give up the fight. Now. is a time to realize that we that we can. have some wins under the current rules, but to make sure that we are clear-eyed. about what we need to do in the big. policies. as we move forward and that again is why. I am so eager for people to get their. hands on uh, on on your new book. >> Well, I appreciate that and again, you. know, look, I'm going to speak on behalf. of everybody who's watching this video. and thanking you for the work that you. and your team are doing in court.

You know, we we are there is a. desperation for. real fighters on on the left and there. has been for a really long time but. throughout that entire process. you and your team have been kind of a. shining light champions for for this. exact cause and frankly without without. the work that you all do we wouldn't be. in the position that we're in right now. where we can ensure that you know, I. know you said hundreds of thousands. I. wouldn't be surprised if millions of. voters were disenfranchised.

if Watson had gone the other way. So a. huge thank you to the work that you and. your team are doing right now. you know, being champions for democracy. So thank you again for everybody who's. watching. very small step that we all can take to. support Mark's invaluable work is to. subscribe to democracy docket that link. is on the screen and also in the post. description. So if you're not yet signed. up go ahead and sign up. I'm Brian Tyler. Cohen. >> I'm Mark Elias. >> This is democracy watch.