SCOTUS Takes North Carolina Election Mapping Case

[Rightguide]

Supreme Court accepts historic case that could reshape powers of legislatures to set election rules​

Case was brought by North Carolina's GOP House speaker

By Dace Pota
Updated: June 30, 2022 -

The Supreme Court agreed Thursday to hear a major election case regarding North Carolina GOP lawmakers having the authority to draw a partisan election map without state judges' interfering.

The decision could impact future congressional and presidential elections. The high court will take up the case when its next term begins in October.

The, case of Moore vs. Harper, asks the court to uphold the concept – known as the "independent state legislature" theory – that state legislators have the sole and "independent" authority to set rules for federal elections in their states, without interference or oversight by the governor or the state judges.

North Carolina GOP House Speaker Timothy Moore asked the high court to consider the case on appeal of his own state Supreme Court’s decision earlier this year to strike down the theory relating to a gerrymandering case.

Critics of the theory argue that it would reduce judicial oversight of election rules.

The theory "would give state legislatures wide authority to gerrymander electoral maps and pass voter suppression laws," according to the liberal-leaning Brennan Center for Justice think tank.

More here: https://justthenews.com/government/...ndependent-state-legislature-theory-next-term

 

[ll74]

No legislature, who has a stake in their own election, should have the ability to draw districts.

That's my opinion and I continue to lobby my state legislature to adjust current laws accordingly. The only method I can see are to create an independent commission for each state...perhaps voted on four years before the census.

 

[HisArpy]

No legislature, who has a stake in their own election, should have the ability to draw districts.

That's my opinion and I continue to lobby my state legislature to adjust current laws accordingly. The only method I can see are to create an independent commission for each state...perhaps voted on four years before the census.

It's a good concept in theory but every "independent commission" I've ever heard of is partisan one way or the other because most people can't set aside their politics.

 

[ll74]

It's a good concept in theory but every "independent commission" I've ever heard of is partisan one way or the other because most people can't set aside their politics.

There will always be politics. But removing the politics from those who have the stake in the result (at least from a candidate perspective) is a huge step towards independence.

Right now, if I'm the one running, I have incentive to increase my voter base when drawing districts. Certainly parties also have this stake, but there are ways to address that.

 

[Chernosoth]

Michigan's independent commission was sued twice, for reducing Republican and black majority districts. Anger from all sides may be the best we can do in redistricting.

 

[ll74]

Michigan's independent commission was sued twice, for reducing Republican and black majority districts. Anger from all sides may be the best we can do in redistricting.

Ohio's independent redistricting fell apart and the majority ended up basically using the old maps with no effort for much change at all. As long as it's tied to majority/minority, you're bound to skip it entirely.

At least the map they draw only is valid for four years