Yet he ultimately voted against the lawmakers cautioning that it was too close to the impending midterms to change the map.Īll eyes will be on Justice Amy Coney Barrett during arguments. “The issue is almost certain to keep arising until this Court definitively resolves it,” Kavanaugh wrote. “If the language of the Elections Clause is taken seriously, there must be some limit on the authority of state courts to countermand actions taken by state legislatures when they are prescribing rules for the conduct of federal elections,” he wrote.Ĭritically, Justice Brett Kavanaugh said that he agreed with Alito that the underlying Elections Clause questions were important. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, said that he thought the lawmakers in the case will ultimately prevail. Under the independent state legislature theory, the lawmakers argue, state legislatures should be able to set rules with no interference from the state courts.Ī 5-4 US Supreme Court declined to block the court-ordered map on an emergency basis. They relied upon the Elections Clause of the Constitution that provides that rules governing the “manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives” must be prescribed in “each state by the legislature thereof.” Top row: Chief Justice John Roberts, Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito bottom row: Associate Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney BarrettĬonservative justices come to same-sex marriage controversy with minds made up Republican legislators raced to the US Supreme Court in March 2022 asking the justices to freeze the decision by the state Supreme Court. The state Supreme Court struck the map as an illegal partisan gerrymander and replaced it with a temporary court-drawn map more favorable to Democrats. On the surface, the case before the justices presents a redistricting dispute out of North Carolina involving a lower court decision that invalidated the state’s congressional map. ![]() “That would be just a complete, fundamental shift in the way we have always done business.” She stressed that it could impact not just claims of partisan gerrymandering but other rules on issues such as voter id and absentee voting regulations.įour conservative justices interested in the issue “There’s a lot that could be implicated in this decision if the court were to say basically that the legislature of a state has free, unchecked rein to decide federal elections,” said Abha Khanna, a lawyer for Democratic voters in the case. How William Rehnquist led to the new monumental challenge to presidential election rulesĪs things stand, Republicans currently control the majority of state legislatures and have seen multiple proposed congressional legislative maps struck down by state courts. (AP Photo/Hillery Smith Garrison, File) Hillery Smith Garrison/AP The dispute comes amid the recent explosion of litigation surrounding voting rules and a renewed effort by Trump to allege massive fraud at the polling place – a baseless claim rejected by Democrats and Republicans alike.Īs recently as last week, Trump called for the “termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution” in a social media post.įILE - In this file photo, Chief Justice of the United States William Rehnquist addresses a meeting of the Federal Justices Association in Arlington, Va. They fear that if the court were to adopt the theory it would abolish necessary checks and balances, upend states’ time-tested election systems, spawn litigation and require states to conduct separate state and federal elections. Voting rights groups say the lawmakers’ position would lead to state legislatures having absolute authority without judicial oversight, even perhaps choosing their desired election winners. ![]() Now, North Carolina Republican lawmakers are asking the justices to adopt the long-dormant legal theory in a fight over redistricting maps, saying it allows state legislatures to set rules in federal elections without any constraints by state courts or other state authorities. Supporters of former President Donald Trump relied on versions of the so-called independent state legislature doctrine during the efforts to overturn the 2020 election. LIVE UPDATES: Supreme Court hears arguments on voting rights case The US Supreme Court is seen in Washington, DC on February 8, 2022.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |