BREAKING: MUST-SEE Supreme Court UPDATE rocks midterm election

I'm joined now by national voting rights. correspondent at Mother Jones and the. author of the book Minority Rule, Ari. Berman. Ari, thanks for joining me. again. >> Hey Brian, great to talk to you again. >> So obviously we're talking in the. aftermath of the Supreme Court handing. down the Cale decision, which guts. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. So I. think in large part we anticipated this. move, but from your vantage as somebody. who is a long-time expert on voting. rights, on. well, your your aptly titled book. Minority Rule, how much of a blinking. red light is this for Democrats.

recognizing that Republicans now have. carte blanche to redraw. redraw any maps that have black. opportunity districts? >> It it's a flashing red light for. democracy. It's an emergency for. democracy because the Supreme Court not. only gutted the Voting Rights Act for. the third time, I might add, but they. also did it in a way that allows some. states a very narrow window to redraw. their districts for 2026. I thought the. justices would at least have the decency.

to wait until this cycle of. redistricting is over, but as always the. Roberts Court showed how nakedly. partisan it is. So they not just. completely gutted the Voting Rights Act, they actually gave some states the. opportunity to redraw their maps this. cycle. And the larger context of this is. Democrats had basically fought. Republicans to a draw in the. gerrymandering arms race that Trump. launched. Now if all of these southern. states, or at least some of them are. able to redraw, and Democrats can't,

that's going to put Democrats at a. disadvantage heading into 2026. They. might be able to overcome it. Obviously. if there's a wave election, they will be. able to overcome it, but this decision. just shows how nakedly partisan the. Roberts Court has been. They basically. say you shouldn't change election laws. in the middle of an election, then they. completely rewrite the Voting Rights Act. in the middle of an election season. >> So what states are you looking at right. now? Obviously in the immediate. aftermath of this move, Louisiana has. already called uh to cancel their.

primaries so that they can redraw their. maps, but what other states are you. looking at right now? >> I'm looking at states where the. primaries haven't happened yet. So, Louisiana is one of them, South. Carolina's another, Tennessee's another. Obviously, Florida already redrew, uh. but they feel like maybe they're on. firmer ground now with this decision. I'm not actually sure if it's true. So, I I think maybe you're talking about. four to five seats potentially shifting. We'll see what happens. Um the the. Supreme Court's opinion was not a model.

of clarity. And so, it made it clear. that drawing new districts uh to try to. advantage minority voters is. unconstitutional. Leave aside the fact. they said it was legal in Alabama 2. years ago, and that's why Louisiana did. this. So, they're already contradicting. their own rulings from 2 years ago, but. it's also not clear if states can just. rush in and dismantle districts that. have existed for decades like in. Mississippi, like in South Carolina, like in Tennessee. So, this issue is. headed before the courts again. Uh. certainly the lower court and and.

potentially the Supreme Court before the. election. >> So, if you're the Democrats and you're. watching this take place right now, what. are the first moves that the left makes. in response to this? >> Well, the left is going to have to have. a plan to redraw in 2028. It's going to. be hard for them to redraw in any more. states in in 2026, but uh certainly in. 2028 they're going to have to have the. blue states that didn't do it for one. reason or another. Um there were some. states that couldn't do it under their. state constitutions like New York and. Colorado that could redraw in 2028.

There's other states that could have. done it like Illinois, like Maryland. that chose not to. I think the the the. pressure's going to be on every single. blue state to do this because if every. red state redraws to not just pick up. seats for partisan advantage, but to. wipe away gains of advances for minority. voters in the civil rights movement, then it's really a moral of imperative. for blue states to respond to level the. playing field. In the immediate uh in in. the immediate though, I think that. Democrats are going to have to organize.

in some of these states. Obviously, if. you dismantle districts that are held by. black members of Congress, black voters. still have to go somewhere. They can't. just be completely wiped off the map. And so that means that there has to be. efforts to contest these seats in. southern states. And there's some. evidence already that the gerrymandered. maps that were drawn in places like. Texas, in places like Florida might not. be as secure as Republicans thought they. would be. And that there's also. possibilities for pick up opportunities. in some red states like Tennessee, for.

example. And so Democrats need a. long-term strategy to try to counteract. what Republicans are doing. But in the. short term, they also just need to take. advantage of a political climate in. which Trump and Republicans are. unpopular to contest every seat possible. including in the South and expand the. map. >> So on that point of Democrats taking a. long-term strategy, I've I've been. thinking about this a lot because, you. know, I think from the activist front, we advocate for Democrats to to retake. control of the House, the Senate, the.

White House, pass good voting rights. legislation, uh you know, the the John. R. Lewis Voting Rights Act, the Freedom. to Vote Act that was HR1 during the. Biden era. Even if these laws get passed, we now. see that there is a rogue branch of. government that's always going to strike. it down. This Supreme Court will not let. um a voting rights act, whether it comes. from 1965 or 2029, stand um at least. under the the um the ideological. breakdown that they have right now. And.

so. what is the solution longer term than. even just retaking full control of. government, recognizing that it's always. just going to be a battle back and forth. where Democrats can pass voting rights. legislation, and then Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and the rest of these. right-wingers in the Supreme Court will. strike it down. And so, nothing is. permanent in that sense. >> Yeah, that's why reforming the Supreme. Court has to be the number one priority. of the progressive movement. Otherwise, basically every progressive idea is. going to die at court. And the court has.

elevated itself over the over the other. branches of government. I mean, they. just completely in the Klawe decision, they completely overruled the 1982. reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act. that was passed overwhelmingly by the. Congress. And normally, the courts were. supposed to defer to the Congress. And. they have basically said, when it comes. to these kind of issues, we are the. final word. In some cases, they say. Congress can legislate. It's not even. clear in this case Congress can.

legislate cuz basically they're saying, we're the only people that can. enforce the 50th Amendment, the only. people that can understand the 50th. Amendment. No, goes without saying they completely. turned the 50th Amendment on its head by. basically saying that a law that was. meant to give black men the right to. vote and to get rid of the vestiges of. slavery is now something where you can. find districts that were drawn to help. the descendants of slavery, that's. unconstitutional. So, they've completely. turned the 50th Amendment on its head. They've completely overruled the will of.

Congress. And and that's why I think. it's not enough to ban partisan. gerrymandering or make it easier to vote. if you don't change the composition of. the Supreme Court, which I believe was. illegally constructed in terms of how. they did it in terms of stealing seats. and and other harmful measures they. used. Um then, really, all of your other. priorities are are not going to. ultimately survive. >> Do you have confidence that this. Democratic Party or or what new. iteration comes, you know, in 2026 and. 2028, will have the spine to do that?

Because this is not a Democratic Party. that's known for upending norms, uh for. making uncomfortable the institutions of. government. I mean, so often we see a. blind deference to the institutions as. they stand. I mean, the the filibuster. has this sacrosanctity, the. parliamentarian has this sacrosanctity. when it comes to uh when it comes to. Democrats who are largely. institutionalist, but the reality is, I. mean, you and I both just explained it. Like, no voting rights legislation, really no progressive legislation will.

stand with the Supreme Court as it. stands right now. And so, everything uh. as it relates to the court is. foundational, but that's a big swing for. a Democratic Party that will often let. the smallest roadblock stand in their. way when it comes to, you know, either. upending some norm versus actually. getting legislation through by any means. necessary, ala Mitch McConnell. So, what. do you think about, you know, the the. stomach of this uh Democratic Party as. we move forward to actually get some of. this stuff done? >> Well, I think they have to have the.

stomach for it. I think the people that. have the stomach for it are going to. emerge as the leaders of the party, uh. particularly in 2028. There's no way. there's going to be a Democratic nominee. for president who doesn't support. strongly reforming the Supreme Court. Uh. this is not going to be Biden kind of. flirting with Supreme Court reform. They're going to have to tackle this. issue head-on and understand that the. Supreme Court is the greatest impediment. to progressive politics in America right. now. And so, I think that the. circumstances are changing in the. Democratic Party. Uh they understand.

that the the court is going to just keep. going further and further and further in. terms of what they're going to do on the. Voting Rights Act. I mean, this Think. about this, Brian. The Supreme Court. gutted the heart of the Voting Rights. Act in 2013 by ruling that states with. long history of discrimination no longer. had to approve their voting changes with. the federal government. But, they said, "Oh, we're not touching that other part. of the Voting Rights Act, Section 2 of. the Voting Rights Act." Then, 8 years. later, they severely weakened Section 2. of the Voting Rights Act and made it. very hard to strike down discriminatory.

voting laws. Then, 5 years after that, they gutted the Voting Rights Act again. and basically say that you can no longer. police racial gerrymandering in. redistricting, that you can no longer. protect decades of advances for minority. voters. So, they're not stopping. The. point is is they're not moderating. Yeah, they moderate on some cases where. the Federalist Society opposes things. that Trump does, like on tariffs. They're not even taking an an. anti-conservative position. They're just. taking a position where there are some. factions of the Republican Party that. don't like what Trump is doing. But when.

it comes to things like the advances of. the civil rights movement, um. progressive policies more broadly, this. is a court that is extremely hostile uh. to basically the civil rights revolution. of the 1960s. Uh and I don't know how. you legislate against that other than. changing the composition of the court. itself. >> And and it makes sense to do so. I mean, the first Supreme Court had six. justices, there were six federal court. circuits. Uh after that, the court grew. to seven when there was another uh court.

circuit that was added. So, it has. always been in line with the number of. federal court circuits. But it stopped at nine, and now we have. 13 federal court circuits. And so, it. would make sense even unto itself. Like, if you want to defer to norms, this is. actually the norm that the number of. Supreme Court seats um is is compliant. with the number of federal court. circuits. >> Yeah, and of course. there's no There are certain things that. are built into the Constitution in terms. of the Supreme Court. But there's lots of things that you.

could do that are different with the. Supreme Court. There's also courts that. function other ways. I think we like to. think that the Supreme Court every court. functions like the Supreme Court. There. are lots of state Supreme Courts that, for example, justices are elected. They. have term limits. They have strict. ethics codes. They're beholden to the. public in ways that this current Supreme. Court is not. And I mean, you had a. situation where the the majority. decision in Clay was written by Sam. Alito. A night before that decision, he.

was at a Trump state dinner. This is a. guy whose wife flew an insurrection. flag, okay? I mean, there are a lot of. red flags here in terms of just the. actions of Alito, not to mention how. Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett were put on the court in the. first place, right? I mean, you [snorts]. have one justice who occupies a current. a stolen seat. Another justice who had a. FBI investigation swept totally under.

the rug. Another justice who was. confirmed eight days before the election. when they blocked someone eight months. before the election. I mean, so there's. there's so many irregularities in terms. of democratic norms that this court has. been constituted, not to mention then. it's a product of a lot of. anti-democratic actions and then through. its opinions, it then deepens the crisis. in democracy by doing things like. gutting the Voting Rights Act.

>> All right, your book is called Minority. Rule. It was it was an excellent read, but as we look at the moment that we're. in right now, it's hard to feel like. that exact phenomenon isn't being. entrenched when you have a Republican. party that, despite its unpopularity, despite the fact that they're actually. losing elections when when when voters. have the ability to vote directly on. those representatives or on those. candidates, um we are seeing a. consolidation of power on on the right. Um. and and frankly, as we move forward, a.

lot of things have to go perfectly for. the left. Like the left has to get full. control of government uh to be able to. push anything forward. The left has to. have a big enough margin that the. filibuster is eliminated. Then the left. has to have the stomach to do something. that they've not had the stomach to do, which is uh to actually expand the court. to get it done, technically speaking, uh. so that they can actually see this thing. through. And then they have to pass this. legislation, um pass these uh processes. to expand the court. So, everything has. to go perfectly.

What level of confidence do you have, um, you know, as somebody who's been talking. about the issue of minority rule for so. long, that in this subsequent Congress, if Democrats do have full control, they. can get it done and kind of stem this. this tidal wave of anti-democratic. authoritarian moves by Republican Party. that relies on entrenching minority. rule? >> Well, there's going to have to be a lot. of pressure on them to do so. And and. just I I take the example of the. gerrymandering arms race. When Texas.

redrew its districts based on pressure. from Trump, there was the expectation. that Republicans would just go state by. state by state and do this, and. Democrats wouldn't be able to fight back. cuz they were too invested in good. government or they were too hamstrung by. laws in their states. And the fact that. you had California fight back, you had. Virginia fight back. I mean, that gave. Democrats a spine. And things that. seemed impossible suddenly became. possible. And we need that same kind of. thing here. Um, it's not just about. winning elections, and the Democratic. Party is in a much better position to.

win elections in 2026 than they were. before. But then it's following through. on winning those elections, and that's. why I think we need a popular movement. to do this. And Supreme Court reform has. to go beyond just the circle of good. government types in Washington, D.C., and has to be a mobilizing issue for. people. That, you know, whatever issue. you care about, it is threatened by this. current iteration of the Supreme Court. I do think that is happening more and. more, though. Dobbs really was a.

breaking point for a lot of people. There have been a series of decisions. since Dobbs. Um, I think the VRA. decision has really crystallized the. threat to democracy that we're facing. And so, I think more and more people. care about reforming the Supreme Court. More and more people have a negative. opinion of the Supreme Court. More and. more people realize how nakedly partisan. this court is Uh, and I [snorts] believe. that Democratic activists, the. Democratic base, people in general just. have to keep pushing Democratic leaders.

on this. Very rarely does change happen. from the top in the Democratic Party. It. happens with with people pushing and. this is an issue that people are going. to have to continue to push on. >> Look, you have been a champion for this. issue for years and years and years. before it was you know the thing that. we're talking about right now. So highly. recommend for everybody who's watching. and listening. If you haven't yet had. the opportunity to grab a copy of. Minority Rule, I'm going to put that. link right here on the screen and also. in the post description. If you're. listening on the podcast, I'm going to. throw it into the show notes. All right, as as always thanks for the work you're.

doing. Thanks for taking the time today. >> Always great to talk to you Brian. Keep. up the great work as well. >> [music].