I want to make one point about the Supreme Court's decision in the Wisconsin case that I'm surprised has not been made. The Supreme Court & the federal courts more broadly have actually not done a great job historically of providing remedies for structural disfranchisement. 1/7

Even in the classic context of race, in which the Constitution specifically provided a right, the federal courts have failed at last as often as they have succeeded. This is why the Voting Rights Act was necessary. The Warren Court was really the exception. 2/7

It's easy and simple to blame the US Supreme Court and the conservatives on the Court. But the blame really lies with the US Constitution, which has generally delegated to the states the responsibility for running elections and for administering voting rights. 3/7

The federal courts are just not equipped under our system to provide efficient remedies in these types of structural disfranchisement claims. And this is particularly so when dealing with the administration of state elections. 4/7

If Wisconsin, including the state legislature and the state judges, decides that it is going to hold an election in the midst of an epidemic, our federal constitution does not have much to say. And thus the federal courts have a limited role to play. 5/7

One can blame Roberts and the conservatives on the Court, they are an easy target. But the real problem, the harder target, is the Constitution that basically grants the states vast authority to structure and run the electoral process, including federal elections. 6/7

This explanation is not as facile or satisfactory, as say, calling the Justices partisan hacks. But it has the virtue of descriptive accuracy. 7/7