Menu
Sign In Search Podcasts Charts People & Topics Add Podcast API Blog Pricing

Will Baude

๐Ÿ‘ค Speaker
1738 total appearances

Appearances Over Time

Podcast Appearances

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

Where basically the time it takes to litigate a case well from the district court to the Supreme Court is sufficiently long that you couldn't necessarily get an answer.

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

And so we just kind of looked it over.

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

Now, by the way, in the new interim docket world, it's not going to make sense anymore.

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

Like now, obviously, you can litigate a case from the district court to the Supreme Court in like a month and a half if you try.

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

And get a very, very lengthy opinion from the court.

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

Go ask the National Guard.

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

But in stylized fact, the basic problem is he's an incumbent.

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

He's one of the small number of Republicans who have been gerrymandered into a relatively safe Republican district in Illinois.

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

So he wins every time by like 60 to 70 percent of the vote.

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

And nobody thinks, including him, that these late counted ballots are going to make him loose.

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

I mean, you never know, but nobody's going to make him lose.

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

So you can see how at one level the Seventh Circuit said, well, look, what's it to you?

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

Just as the Seventh Circuit might say, you don't have standing to go ask us to figure out the correct vote total in the 2022 election, which is like way over.

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

You know, there's no reason to believe it matters to you in 2026 any more than it mattered to you in 2024 and 2022.

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

Not so, says the Supreme Court.

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

I mean, it's a relatively short opinion.

Divided Argument
Lake Shrimp

The way the court starts its analysis is it says, look, under Article 3 of the Constitution, plaintiffs must have a personal stake in a case to have standing to sue.