Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments on Case Potentially Impacting all Elections

[Zincwarrior]

A very interesting case is coming for oral arguments today. It essentially decides whether the Constitution gives authority over elections to the states - subject to state courts, state constitutions and Governor veto powers - or ONLY to the individual legislatures.

What to know about Moore v. Harper, the high-stakes elections case before the Supreme Court

The justices will test the "independent state legislature theory" in a case that could have far-reaching consequences for elections.

www.cbsnews.com

Washington — "Incredibly disruptive." Wreaking "havoc." "Potentially damaging for American democracy." Those are just some of the characterizations of a legal theory that is at the center of a case set to be argued before the Supreme Court on Wednesday.

Known as the "independent state legislature theory," which largely laid dormant for the better part of 15 years, the idea may seem stale at first glance. But it has election law experts sounding the alarm that its embrace by the high court would upend election administration nationwide and ensnare federal courts in "endless" disputes about state law.

While four of the court's conservative members expressed interest in the idea earlier this year, it's unclear whether a majority of the justices is ready to adopt the theory pushed by North Carolina Republicans in the case known as Moore v. Harper. Some experts, though, believe there is no question on what the court should do.

"It's not a prediction, it's a normative statement: The Supreme Court cannot issue an opinion supporting the notion that state legislatures are able to operate unchecked when they're making federal election law," said Tom Wolf, deputy director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. "Any rubric they would use to determine the right outcome points in the direction of needing to reject the independent state legislature theory."

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Supreme court Justices have a long history of appreciating oral.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

The Corrupt Democrat Party's opposition to election security and integrity is proof that they are opposed to Voting Rights.

 

[jwoodie]

A very interesting case is coming for oral arguments today. It essentially decides whether the Constitution gives authority over elections to the states - subject to state courts, state constitutions and Governor veto powers - or ONLY to the individual legislatures.

What to know about Moore v. Harper, the high-stakes elections case before the Supreme Court

The justices will test the "independent state legislature theory" in a case that could have far-reaching consequences for elections.

www.cbsnews.com

This article presents another bogus argument that the U.S. Constitution is, itself, unconstitutional. Among other things, the term "federal election" is a misnomer designed to confer judicial authority to overrule state legislatures, who are specified by the Constitution as having the sole power to conduct elections. Individual state judges exercising veto power over this authority is a direct violation of this constitutional provision and should be clearly ruled as such.