Washington Weekly Podcast: SCOTUS cases, U.S. midterm election update

Shane Lieberman · UBS

House likely to flip to Democrats; the open question is how large their majority will be.

Shane expects Democrats to take the House in the November midterms, with the real uncertainty being the size of their majority. His support is the campaign timing: about a month to go, last-minute ads being run, and roughly 2 million votes already cast through early and mail-in voting. He argues the window to move voters for or against a candidate is closing, so late campaigning may not shift the outcome much.

“I think the House is likely going to Democrats. ... It's more of a question of how big their majority is going to be.”at 4:21

Shane Lieberman · UBS

Senate control is tight: Democrats' path runs through Ohio, Texas and Alaska, with Alaska possibly taking weeks to call.

Shane puts the Senate at 50 Republicans to 47 Democrats today, with Democrats expected to flip North Carolina, which he says makes it 52 for Democrats. He calls Ohio, Texas and Alaska the most likely routes to Democratic control and says Iowa is also contested. He expects Kansas to stay Republican after a final push for Senator Roger Marshall. In Alaska, a ranked-choice system and two candidates named Dan Sullivan could cause confusion. The state's size could delay the count by days or weeks, so Senate control might not be known on election night.

“as of today, it's a 50 three-forty seven split for Republicans. I think Democrats are gonna pick up North Carolina, which makes it 52 for gate... I'm closely watching Ohio, Texas, and Alaska as probably the path for Democrats to take over the senate.”at 4:39

Shane Lieberman · UBS

A Supreme Court ruling for Boulder against energy firms would likely bring more state and local climate suits.

Shane describes the City of Boulder's suit against two energy companies, which alleges they knew their activities contributed to climate change and caused harm to the county and its residents. He says the case is one observers will watch closely. If the Supreme Court rules for the city and county, he expects more lawsuits by states and localities against energy companies. The argument rests on the precedent a ruling would set, not on any company's financials.

“if the supreme court, when they eventually rule on this, rules in favor of the county and city versus the energy companies, probably expect more of similar lawsuits by states and localities against some energy companies.”at 2:36