SCOTUS Ready to Hear the Case on Election Rules Law That Will Drastically Impact Future Elections

The Republican speaker of North Carolina's state House has petitioned the Supreme Court to hear the case of Moore v. Harper. He is challenging the State Supreme Court’s decision to reject the congressional maps, drawn by the legislature and replace it with their own map. However, the implications of this case go far beyond the boundaries of Congress.

If leftist judges and the executive branch can override the state legislature's ability to write election laws will be determined by this case.

The timing is critical because the decision, which typically would be made by next June, could be made by the fall if it affects the midterm elections and there is no option to appeal after the election even if the ruling next year goes in their favor. Furthermore, it seems likely that the plaintiffs will win because the state legislature is explicitly given authority by the constitution to conduct elections.

Breitbart reported,

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear a case next term to potentially bolster the elections power of state legislatures.

The high court announced it would take up the case, known as Moore vs. Harper, brought by North Carolina’s Republican state House speaker who has challenged the state Supreme Court’s decision to dismiss the legislature’s congressional maps that would have given the party an advantage through partisan gerrymandering.

The North Carolina Supreme Court in February ruled that the legislative maps, which gave Republicans as many as 11 safe districts compared to just three for Democrats, violated the state’s constitution in a 4-3 decision.

In March, the U.S. high court turned back efforts by Republicans to nullify new congressional maps approved by state court for this year’s midterm elections.

The left is in a panic after they managed to stage a coup in 2020 by working with activist judges and dishonest state representatives like Mark Brnovich in Arizona and Brad Raffensperger in Georgia. In Georgia, the dishonest Raffensperger and Hillary Clinton's lawyer Marc Elias reached an agreement for the use of drop boxes despite the fact that neither the law nor the legislature had given their approval.

Even though it was against the law, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decided that incomplete ballots could still be counted and that ballots could still be taken up to three days after the election.

The Guardian reported,

The case, Moore v Harper, involves a dispute over North Carolina’s congressional districts. At the heart of the case is what has come to be known as the independent state legislature theory (ISL) – the idea that state legislatures cannot be checked by state supreme courts when it comes to setting rules for federal elections, even if the legislature’s actions violate the state’s constitution. It’s an idea that three justices – William Rehnquist, Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia – mused about in Bush v Gore, but has gained little traction since. The decision to hear the case immediately raised serious alarm from experts, who say the idea is anti-democratic and is antithetical to federalism and the separation of powers at the heart of American government.

The views and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author of the article and not necessarily shared or endorsed by