Campaign Finance Regulations & Political Influence - The Supreme Court heard arguments regarding campaign finance regulations, potentially allowing unlimited party committee spending, likened to "Citizens United 2.0" [1] - Republicans anticipate favorable rulings from the court before the midterms, while the Trump Department of Justice did not defend the existing rules [1] - A potential ruling striking down regulations would favor billionaire money in politics and Republicans [1] Texas Redistricting & Racial Gerrymandering - A lower court found Texas' redistricting unconstitutional and racially gerrymandered, but the Supreme Court allowed it "for now" [1] - The redistricting aimed for partisan gain, with race allegedly used to achieve it, similar to using race to influence outcomes, which the Supreme Court has previously restricted [2] - A three-judge court found racial gerrymandering by a 2-1 decision, but the Supreme Court allowed the redistricting, potentially disenfranchising Black voters [1] Supreme Court's Role & Ethical Concerns - The Supreme Court is seen as overtaking the role of federal district courts in fact-finding, as highlighted by Justice Alito's concurring opinion [4] - A federal judge attended a presidential rally, raising concerns about inappropriate behavior and impunity, potentially influenced by the Supreme Court's perceived lack of ethical boundaries [7][8] - There are concerns that Trump's perceived immunity is extending to his supporters, leading to potential misconduct [9][10]