Trump's Justice Department may have accidentally handed Democrats five House seats - Ian Millhiser @ Vox

[LetMyPeopleVote]

35. There is a crazed dissent to this ruling that is really strange

I have been volunteering on election law/voting rights matters since 2004 and Prof. Hasen is a great source of information in this area. This dissent is nuts

Judge Jerry Smith Issues His 104-Page Dissent to Yesterday’s 3-Judge District Court Holding that Texas’s Re-Redistricting is Likely an Unconstitutional Racial Gerrymander. Along the Way He Calls Out the “Pernicious” & “Outrageous” Behavior of Judge Brown in the Majority electionlawblog.org?p=153106

— Rick Hasen (@rickhasen.bsky.social) 2025-11-19T20:44:24.987Z

https://electionlawblog.org/?p=153106

It begins with a remarkable attack on Judge Brown (a Trump appointee) explaining that Smith was not responsible for any delay in issuing the decision:

In my 37 years on the federal bench, this is the most outrageous conduct by a judge that I have ever encountered in a case in which I have been involved.
In summary, Judge Brown has issued a 160-page opinion without giving me any reasonable opportunity to respond. I will set forth the details. The readers can judge for themselves.

And then turning to the merits:

The main winners from Judge Brown’s opinion are George Soros andmGavin Newsom. The obvious losers are the People of Texas and the Rule of Law. I dissent.
In the interest of time, this dissent is, admittedly, disjointed. Usually, in dissenting from an opinion of this length, I would spend more days refining and reorganizing the dissent for purposes of impact and readability. But that approach is not reasonably possible here because these two judges have not allowed it.

The resulting dissent is far from a literary masterpiece. If, however, there were a Nobel Prize for Fiction, Judge Brown’s opinion would be a prime candidate.

[This post is in progress]

See also

Link to tweet

I tried to read this dissent but is very disjointed and poorly written