Loading...
In a significant ruling on Tuesday, the US Supreme Court dealt a blow to a legal theory favored by conservatives, which sought to grant state legislatures extensive authority in shaping rules for presidential and congressional elections. The court’s decision, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, came in response to a case involving Republican state legislators and their redrawing of North Carolina’s 14 US House districts. The state’s highest court blocked the map, citing its unfair bias against Democratic voters.
At the heart of the legislators’ argument was the “independent state legislature” doctrine, a once-marginal legal theory that aimed to exclude state courts and constitutions from regulating federal elections. Advocates of the doctrine relied on the Elections Clause of the US Constitution, which grants each state legislature the power to prescribe the “times, places, and manner” of federal elections. However, the Supreme Court firmly rejected this interpretation, emphasizing that state legislatures are not immune to ordinary state judicial review.
Chief Justice Roberts, joined by conservative Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett and the court’s three liberal members, formed the 6-3 majority in the ruling. In dissent, conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch argued that the case should have been dismissed altogether.
Opponents of the “independent state legislature” doctrine, including legal scholars, Democrats, and advocates for voting rights, have warned that it poses a threat to democratic norms. The doctrine’s critics contend that it could facilitate gerrymandering, a practice where electoral district boundaries are manipulated to marginalize certain voters while amplifying the influence of others. Moreover, they argue that it would enable legislatures to enact further voting restrictions and engage in extreme partisan gerrymandering. Notably, the Supreme Court had previously prohibited federal judges from intervening in cases of partisan gerrymandering in 2019.
The court’s decision was hailed as a “resounding victory for free and fair elections in the United States” by Abha Khanna, an attorney representing some of the challengers to the North Carolina district map. Khanna expressed relief that the Supreme Court had firmly rejected the “dangerous theory” of the independent state legislature, which could have allowed “rogue legislators to enact policies that suppress voters and subvert elections without adequate oversight from state court.”
Get JD Journal in Your Mail
Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!
Governor Roy Cooper of North Carolina, a Democrat, welcomed the ruling, stating that it curtailed some of the power wielded by Republican state legislatures and upheld the importance of checks and balances. However, Governor Cooper cautioned that Republican lawmakers in North Carolina and across the nation remained a genuine threat to democracy, pointing to their ongoing efforts to pass laws that manipulate elections for partisan advantage and hinder the freedom to vote.
The “independent state legislature” doctrine has gained traction among conservatives and Republican politicians, who have enacted new laws and restrictions in various states to combat voter fraud. These efforts have intensified following former President Donald Trump’s baseless claims that the 2020 election was stolen through widespread voter fraud.
With the US Supreme Court’s rejection of the “independent state legislature” doctrine, the balance of power in electoral processes remains intact. The decision reaffirms the role of state courts and judicial review in safeguarding the integrity of elections, offering reassurance to those concerned about potential abuses of authority.
Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.
