The North Carolina Supreme Court overturned a previous ruling that disallowed partisan gerrymandering, allowing Republicans in the state to redraw the state’s congressional lines that heavily favored the GOP.
The decision throws into question the status of a case at the U.S. Supreme Court and whether that court’s 6-3 Republican-appointed majority will rule on a contentious theory known as the “independent state legislature theory.”
NAMESAKE OF MOORE V. HARPER ELECTION CASE URGES SUPREME COURT TO TAKE BOLD ACTION
The North Carolina court held that there is “no judicially manageable standard by which to adjudicate partisan gerrymandering claims” and that courts “are not intended to meddle in policy matters,” according to its 218-page decision.
“This case is not about partisan politics but rather about realigning the proper roles of the judicial and legislative branches. Today we begin to correct course, returning the judiciary to its designated lane,” the majority opinion said, which was authored by North Carolina Supreme Court Chief Justice Paul Newby, a Republican.
In a dissent authored by Justice Anita Earls, a Democrat, she decried the decision as a “betrayal to the democratic values upon which our constitution is based,” arguing that such a decision “will not stand forever.” Her dissent was joined by the court’s other Democrat, Justice Michael Morgan.
The ruling also tossed out a previous decision that ruled against a law requiring photo identification at polls. The court’s former Democratic majority found that the law was enacted with racially discriminatory intent.
Jason Snead, executive director of Honest Elections Project, released a statement celebrating the decision and said that the result was spurred by voters who elected a new 5-2 Republican majority on the state’s high court.
“The Court’s former Democratic majority used these hyper-partisan lawsuits to strike down a popular voter ID law, attempt to gerrymander the state for Democrats, and even invented a way for courts to strike down constitutional amendments passed by the people of North Carolina,” Snead told the Washington Examiner.
The case, known at the state level as Harper v. Hall, focuses on a widely criticized ISL theory, which claims that under the U.S. Constitution, state legislatures are granted the ability to determine how federal elections are managed without any checks and balances from state constitutions or state courts.
?BREAKING: in 5-2 partisan split, North Carolina Supreme Court REVERSES prior decisions on partisan gerrymandering, saying it is now permitted.
➡️TAKE AWAY: This will almost certainly mean SCOTUS will not decide the controversial ISL theory this term. https://t.co/il4XmWuWY1
— Marc E. Elias (@marceelias) April 28, 2023
Marc Elias, an attorney who decried the state Supreme Court’s 5-2 decision on Friday as “shameful,” said the gerrymandering reversal “will almost certainly mean SCOTUS will not decide the controversial ISL theory this term.”
North Carolina’s top court previously ruled against a congressional map drawn by Republican state lawmakers for violating the state’s constitution. That court gained a Republican majority last year, and the court was prompted to reconsider the previous ruling after last year’s midterm elections.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
After the former maps were struck down, the nation’s highest court agreed to take up the case on appeal. Now that the decision is overturned, the U.S. Supreme Court could decide to dismiss the appeal without reaching the merits. When the rehearing was granted, the highest court had questions about whether they should still move ahead.
For the state-level impact, North Carolina Democrats stand to lose up to four seats in Congress through the maps drawn by the state GOP lawmakers.
