Supreme Court says state lawmakers can’t just ignore state law when drawing voting districts | Opinion

, saying “Adoption of a strong independent state legislature doctrine would leave partisan gerrymandering unregulated at both the state and federal levels. State legislatures, unconstrained by state law, could then create aggressively gerrymandered congressional districts, possibly leading to an ever more partisan Congress with accompanying gridlock and policy failures.

The court considered whether a state legislature could have the last word, with no review by state courts, regarding gerrymandered congressional districts they created. State legislatures have always been bound by the U.S. Constitution and by federal laws, so they had to draw lines consistent with the federal, for example. But the question was whether a state legislature could draw whatever congressional districts it wanted without review by state courts under state law.

At issue was a legal theory called the “independent state legislature doctrine,” which the court considered in a dispute over gerrymandered North Carolina congressional districts. In early 2022, North Carolina state courts found the Legislature violated the state constitution when it drew congressional districts favoring Republicans. The

the U.S. Constitution gives it authority, unfettered by state courts’ interpretation of the state constitution or laws, to regulate congressional elections, and asked the Supreme Court to agree.In cases that involve the legislative action, courts typically consider whether the legislature has contravened state law. If the legislature has, it has made a mistake, and the legislative action tends to be reversed.

This decision merely reiterates what most people always thought the law was: Legislatures cannot legislate in ways that are inconsistent with the law that governs their actions and their state. This conclusion seems obvious, like saying the sky is blue or water is wet.This case focused on partisanof congressional districts. However, it may apply more generally to rules for congressional elections, such as where, when and how such elections will be run.

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.

Opinion | The ‘King’ and the Supreme CourtFrom WSJopinion: The mixed opinions in U.S. v. Texas deserve more attention because of their implications for executive power
Source: WSJ - 🏆 98. / 63 Read more »

Opinion: The Supreme Court's wise ruling on free speech and online threatsIn the case of an accused online stalker, the court adopted a compromise to both protect free speech and safeguard people from being threatened.
Source: latimes - 🏆 11. / 82 Read more »

Opinion | The worst part about John Roberts’ celebrated Supreme Court rulingChief Justice John Roberts' opinion 'laid landmines for future elections by recalling the court’s infamous ruling in Bush v. Gore,' writes levinsonjessica
Source: MSNBC - 🏆 469. / 51 Read more »

Opinion | The Supreme Court’s Elections MuddleFrom WSJopinion: So much for the radical Supreme Court. A 6-3 majority rejected in Moore v. Harper the argument advanced by some conservatives that the U.S. Constitution bars state courts from reviewing Congressional maps and voting laws.
Source: WSJ - 🏆 98. / 63 Read more »