<mediadc-video-embed data-state="{"cms.site.owner":{"_ref":"00000161-3486-d333-a9e9-76c6fbf30000","_type":"00000161-3461-dd66-ab67-fd6b93390000"},"cms.content.publishDate":1656614135780,"cms.content.publishUser":{"_ref":"00000180-1937-dba2-a7ba-39b778700000","_type":"00000161-3461-dd66-ab67-fd6b933a0007"},"cms.content.updateDate":1656614135780,"cms.content.updateUser":{"_ref":"00000180-1937-dba2-a7ba-39b778700000","_type":"00000161-3461-dd66-ab67-fd6b933a0007"},"rawHtml":"
var _bp = _bp||[]; _bp.push({ "div": "Brid_56613960", "obj": {"id":"27789","width":"16","height":"9","video":"1043975"} }); ","_id":"00000181-b581-d578-a1dd-bfbfc1760000","_type":"2f5a8339-a89a-3738-9cd2-3ddf0c8da574"}”>Video Embed
The Supreme Court announced Thursday that it would take up a widely anticipated elections case that has the potential to upend state courts’ ability to regulate federal elections.
The high-stakes case, Moore v. Harper, centers on a dispute over North Carolina’s congressional map, which was thrown out by the state’s Supreme Court after judges found that new redistricting lines enacted by Republican state legislators amounted to unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering. While a new map more favorable to Democrats was subsequently imposed by state courts, GOP lawmakers sued, alleging that the state’s high court had no right to overturn the North Carolina General Assembly’s map.
SUPREME COURT ALLOWS BIDEN TO END TRUMP-ERA ‘REMAIN IN MEXICO’ POLICY
Moore will provide an opportunity for the Supreme Court to weigh in on a contentious constitutional theory known as the independent state legislature doctrine, which argues that only state legislatures have authority over the administration of federal elections in their states. Often promoted by conservatives, the doctrine is based on a strict interpretation of the Constitution’s elections clause, which says, “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof.”
In its ruling overturning the legislature’s map, North Carolina’s Supreme Court rejected the doctrine, arguing that the “exercise” of lawmakers’ “power” over redistricting is “subject to limitations imposed by other constitutional provisions,” including the state constitution’s free elections clause and equal protection clause.
The Supreme Court’s decision, expected next spring, has the potential to restrict state courts’ ability to combat gerrymandering and state-level election rules that allegedly violate federal civil rights laws, such as the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Pending more expansive rulings, the court previously stayed lower court decisions overturning Republican-drawn congressional maps in Alabama and Louisiana amid allegations of racial gerrymandering. A ruling in Moore favorable to Republicans could clear the way for state legislatures to enact redistricting proposals essentially unencumbered by state-level judicial scrutiny.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
And the implications of the ruling could extend beyond redistricting disputes. Allies of former President Donald Trump have used the independent state legislature doctrine to argue that state courts violated the Constitution during the 2020 election by bypassing legislatures to modify voting rules.
The Supreme Court’s new term is set to begin in October.
