A lawsuit at the U.S. Supreme Court could undermine democracy by allowing state legislators to overrule the will of the people in elections for Congress and the presidency.
In a Q&A session last week, the Attorney General said that the result should keep Americans up at night.
There is a focus on the issue of gerrymander. If North Carolina lawmakers win the case, the states would be able to draw congressional district maps that inflate the power of whichever party controls the legislature.
Blue and red states have done that for a long time. A growing number of state supreme courts are cracking down on partisan gerrymandering.
This case wants the US Supreme Court to prohibit state courts from ruling on federal elections. Issues like voter ID, felon voting rights, mail-in voting and more could be affected by that.
Similar arguments have been shot down multiple times by the Supreme Court. The court's most conservative justices agreed they should look at it again. The court is expected to issue a ruling next year, in time for the 2024 elections.
The case may encompass more than just gerrymander.
The Supreme Court has the power to give so much power to the state legislature that they would be able to overturn the popular vote in presidential elections.
The stakes are higher now than they were four years ago due to the number of election deniers who are running for state legislative seats.
Legislative leaders deny that they would have final say over who gets North Carolina's votes in future presidential races if they win this case.
A spokeswoman for N.C. Senate leader Phil Berger said the case was not about the presidential electors.
In seven swing states that voted for Joe Biden in 2020, Republicans tried to get their states to vote for Donald Trump. Some of the people involved are being investigated.
If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the North Carolina legislature, that strategy could become a real threat in the future.
On the basis of what they have said about the legitimacy of the 2020 election, you have to really be concerned about what would these people do.
Experts disagree on this point, according to The News & Observer. Some people agree with the Attorney General. It is not possible for legislatures to directly override the popular vote and reassign their state's electoral votes, according to others.
Democratic leaders were criticized for being hypocritical because they denied that North Carolina lawmakers were asking for power from the Supreme Court. She said that he should talk to North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper if he is worried about election deniers gaining power on the right.
The Democratic Governors Association made the controversial decision to spend millions of dollars backing far-right candidates in GOP primaries, under the assumption that they will be easier for Democrats to beat in a general election than more moderate Republicans.
If Eric Holder is concerned about election deniers running for office, then I hope he uses his time in North Carolina to have a conversation with Gov. Cooper about their recent decisions to fund candidates they claim are threats to democracy.
No one disagrees that a ruling for North Carolina will give states more power to draw maps without state court oversight. There is only one disagreement, whether it is good or bad.
Most state legislatures are controlled by Republicans. A number of national GOP groups are formally supporting the North Carolina case by downplaying the concerns of Democrats, voting rights advocates, election law experts and others.
The Republican National Committee wrote in a Supreme Court brief that the legal issues raised by North Carolina lawmakers are rather straightforward.
Even more attention is being given to the lawsuit.
BobPhillips said court oversight is important. He pointed out that every election in the last decade was held with Republican-drawn maps that were later ruled unconstitutional.
The N.C. Supreme Court ruled last month that the General Assembly was gerrymandered because of race. The justices wrote in a 4-3 ruling that GOP lawmakers didn't have the authority to put voter ID and income tax amendments on the ballot.
The state courts should not be taken out of the equation according toPhillips.
The North Carolina case was the focus of both his briefings. Reporters from CNN, NBC, CBS and Politico were present.
Republican-led states are not the only ones that have gerrymandered their congressional maps. New York and Maryland are examples of Democratic gerrymander.
This case has left Democrats and Republicans on opposite sides, despite the fact that the group that represents the chief justices of every state and territory supreme court in the country gave a brief to the court attacking North Carolina lawmakers.
Voting rights said that the independent state legislative theory would undermine the basic system of government and the idea of separation of power.
Republicans say that they are not trying to blow up the separation of powers. They say they are just trying to take back powers the founding fathers intended them to have, but that the judicial branch has been taking them away for a long time.
The Independent state legislature theory is not a good idea to scare voters. Seven state Supreme Court justices or 170 state legislators are required to set election policy in Moore v.Harper. State courts have taken it upon themselves to set election policy, despite the fact that the U.S. Constitution clearly states that it is the state legislature that sets election policy.
The Supreme Court has shot down similar arguments before, but Republican politicians say they are different now.
The Supreme Court should rule differently now that state supreme courts have struck down maps for partisan gerrymanders in the past.
The News & Observer and the NC Insider have a politics show called " Under the Dome Politics". Wherever you get your podcasts, you can find it at thecampsite.bio/under thedome.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
