Discourse on Supreme Court Decisions
"Pessimism leads to inaction; optimism leads to involvement."
— Eric Holder
April 21, 2023
The JCC’s new conversation series on major upcoming Supreme Court decisions kicked off on Thursday evening with host Tali Farhadian Weinstein, former federal and state prosecutor, in conversation with Eric Holder, former United States Attorney General.
Issues of the Court: Asking Hard Questions + Seeking Common Ground is a two-part exploration of issues facing our country and society, giving voice to a range of perspectives on cases before the Supreme Court, which is expected to issue its rulings in or before June.
This important series is “designed to surface the complexity of the issues currently before the Supreme Court,” says Rabbi Joanna Samuels, JCC CEO. “Tali Farhadian Weinstein, Eric Holder, and Jeannie Suk Gersen will guide us in how to understand these far-reaching legal matters, and affirm the JCC’s continuing role in engaging our community.”
“This term at the Supreme Court may turn out to be more consequential in terms of its impact on American life than last term…And we really wanted to empower people to know what's happening and try to do something about it,” shared Weinstein at the start of her conversation with Holder on Thursday. They met to discuss two pending cases that concern redistricting cases and the law of democracy: Merrill v. Milligan and Moore v. Harper. Their conversation focused on democracy, the courts, and how elections are run.
Weinstein and Holder worked together throughout the Obama Administration, with Weinstein at the U.S. Department of Justice, first as Counsel to Attorney General Eric Holder, and then as a federal prosecutor. Holder was the first African American to hold the position of U.S. Attorney General. Weinstein has an impressive nearly two decade career, working across a range of American legal institutions, including serving as a law clerk for Judge Merrick B. Garland (now U.S. Attorney General) at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and at the U.S. Supreme Court for Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.
While the event was framed around Merrill v. Milligan and Moore v. Harper, bigger questions about who decides how elections work, and how we can protect our democracy, were front and center in the conversation. Holder has dedicated the current chapter of his career to redistricting and protecting the right to vote. He notes that his work in preserving this right, "morphed into something larger, and is more of a democracy protection now, given all that has gone on in this country…the threats to our democracy have metastasized."
In Moore v. Harper, the U.S. Supreme Court has been asked to decide whether the North Carolina Supreme Court has the power to strike down the state legislature’s illegally gerrymandered Congressional map for violating the North Carolina Constitution. Legislators have argued that a debunked interpretation of the Constitution—known as the “independent state legislature theory”—renders the state courts and state constitution powerless in matters relating to federal law.
Merrill v. Milligan examines whether the state of Alabama’s 2021 redistricting plan for its seven seats in the United States House of Representatives violated Section 2 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Merrill v. Milligan was argued before the Supreme Court in October 2022.
While these two cases feed into a tense political climate that tackle the issues of racial gerrymandering and diluting voting power, Holder acknowledges that he often still leans optimistic about the future of our country. “Pessimism leads to inaction; optimism leads to involvement. But this nation is not that yet…better than it was 50 years ago and better than it was 50 years before that, and unless we acknowledge the fact that progress has been made, we really dishonor the sacrifices and commitment.”
And how we continue that progress is through voting, higher engagement in the civic life of the community in our cities and the state of the nation, and younger generations getting more involved.
Weinstin added that with the proposed redistricting maps in these two cases, it’s important to remember that “communities of interest is a thing that matters, people live in neighborhoods. They don't just think about themselves when they go to the polls, they share ideas with their communities. It's not just about your racial group. It's not about what party you belong to. And generally these commissions are trying to keep the communities together. And I think that that's really powerful. You know, you have to vote not just for yourself, but for the community you live in.”
For the second session of Issues of the Court, Weinstein will meet with Jeannie Suk Gersen, professor of law at Harvard Law School, on May 17 to discuss Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and its impact on affirmative action in college admissions.
Petitioner Students for Fair Admissions sued Harvard College over its admissions process, alleging that the process violates Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by discriminating against Asian American applicants in favor of white applicants. Harvard admits that it uses race as one of many factors in its admissions process but argues that its process adheres to the requirements for race-based admissions outlined in the Supreme Court’s decision in Grutter v. Bollinger. Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard was argued before the Supreme Court in October 2022.
For more information on the Issues of the Court series, and other upcoming conversations and events, visit the Marlene Meyerson JCC Manhattan website.
Photos by Phoebe Jones.
Written by Lauren Magy. Lauren is the Director of Public Relations + Community Engagement at the Marlene Meyerson JCC Manhattan. She has worked at theater and cultural institutions in DC and NY for the past decade.