Garrett and the Spending Clause [long]

[Sanford Levinson]

Mark includes Section 2 of the 1982 Voting Rights Act as among the laws
vulnerable to invalidation by a Bush (or, more properly, Federalist
Society) Supreme Court (i.e., one in which, say, Justice Stevens is
replaced by Michael Luttig (a less likely nominee, particularly in the
first term, than a conservative Hispanic, woman, or Orrin Hatch).  Imagine
that a state repasses a literacy law (or insists on printing its election
materials only in English).  What result, given that literacy laws (and,
most certainly English-only laws) have never been declared verboten by the
US Suprem Court.  Could Congress require the suspension of literacy laws or
English-only laws as a condition of getting federal funds to buy new voting
machines, assuming that Chief Justice Luttig is writing the opinion?

What is it that will prevent Bush from nominating Luttig?  a) Bush will, as
with stem cell research, concientiously study the issue and conclude that
someone with Luttig's views is simply not good for the country.  b)  Bush
will, as with stem cell research, be told by his pollsters that a Luttig
nomination won't fly, but that Garza or Orrin Hatch will (and, besides,
there will be a second term, with a Republican Senate, when Luttig can come
to the Court)?

sandy