Supreme Court Appears Split on Whether to Allow Partisan Control of Elections

  • 📰 truthout
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 67 sec. here
  • 3 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 30%
  • Publisher: 68%

Law Law Headlines News

Law Law Latest News,Law Law Headlines

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that could deliver control of elections to partisan state legislatures and jeopardise protections for the right to vote that are enshrined in nearly every state constitution.

The independent state legislature theory was at the heart of efforts to nullify the results of the 2020 presidential election. Donald Trump’s lawyer John Eastman pushed this fringe theory to facilitate their “campaign to overturn a democratic election, an action unprecedented in American history,” U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter

It includes rulings of state courts grounded in the state’s constitution, citizen ballot measures and governors’ vetoes.that partisan gerrymandering is not reviewable by the federal courts. But in the majority opinion, Roberts wrote that state courts could still apply state constitutions and statutes to restrict partisan gerrymandering.

Roberts, Kavanaugh and Barrett stopped short of fully embracing the independent state legislature theory. They appeared open to a compromise where state supreme courts could rule on state laws governing federal elections subject to review by federal courts in rare instances. “There’s no basis in text or history for concluding that a governor’s veto can act as a substantive check on the legislative prerogative, but judicial review cannot,” attorney Donald Verrilli, who argued on behalf of North Carolina executive branch officials, told the court., the case that handed the 2000 presidential election to George W. Bush.

Jackson noted that since the state constitutions create the state legislatures, constitutional constraints must apply to the legislature. “I guess what I don’t understand,” she told Thompson, “is how you can cut the state constitution out of the equation when it is giving the state legislature the authority to exercise legislative power.

 

Thank you for your comment. Your comment will be published after being reviewed.
Please try again later.

The vast majority of Supreme Court decisions have turned out to be bad ones. Perhaps we need to get rid of lifelong terms, and limit service on SCOTUS to no more than one term of, say, 7 years?

We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:

 /  🏆 69. in LAW

Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Activist who alleged Supreme Court leak appears before House Judiciary CommitteeThe House Judiciary Committee will hear testimony Thursday from a former anti-abortion leader who alleged he was informed in advance about the outcome of a consequential 2014 Supreme Court ruling surrounding the use of contraceptives.
Source: dcexaminer - 🏆 6. / 94 Read more »

Supreme Court weighs state lawmaker power over elections in key caseThe US Supreme Court on Wednesday debated whether state lawmakers should have the power to set voting rules in presidential and congressional elections without oversight from state courts – a…
Source: nypost - 🏆 91. / 67 Read more »

Supreme Court hears arguments over the role of state courts in reviewing election lawsA case over a state court's rejection of North Carolina's congressional map went before the Supreme Court for oral arguments on Wednesday, with potentially huge ramifications.
Source: FoxNews - 🏆 9. / 87 Read more »

Supreme Court justices skeptical of unchecked state power over federal electionsSupreme Court justices cast a skeptical eye Wednesday on claims that state legislatures rule in making decisions about federal elections, worrying that it would upend the usual checks and balances. It's a lot better than election control from one centralized location (DHSgov). In Article III, Section 2, the Constitution unequivocally gives the U.S. Supreme Court power over state courts. no quote no thing to support this claim of skepticism?
Source: WashTimes - 🏆 235. / 63 Read more »

Ohio Supreme Court: State historical society can take over golf course built on ancient earthworksOhio’s state historical society can use its eminent-domain powers to buy out a lease from a Newark golf course located on a series of ancient Native American earthworks, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday. Wow 35 minutes and not a single comment. Must mean NOBODY CARES This article is a bit confusing when reviewing the issues with the buy out price, value and ruling. If I’m understanding correctly there is a possibility of preserving the ancient site. Hope that is the case.
Source: clevelanddotcom - 🏆 301. / 63 Read more »

Supreme Court hears case on limits of state courts to intervene in Congressional map drawingThe Republican-controlled state legislature in North Carolina is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overrule its state court’s decision to toss the maps it deemed unfair, and replace them with a temporary map.
Source: AKNewsNow - 🏆 460. / 53 Read more »