{"id":1958262,"date":"2023-06-27T14:43:02","date_gmt":"2023-06-27T18:43:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/new-scotus-ruling-limits-state-court-interference-with-election-laws\/"},"modified":"2023-06-27T14:47:31","modified_gmt":"2023-06-27T18:47:31","slug":"new-scotus-ruling-limits-state-court-interference-with-election-laws","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/new-scotus-ruling-limits-state-court-interference-with-election-laws\/","title":{"rendered":"SCOTUS ruling curbs state court meddling in election laws."},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">18<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fnew-scotus-ruling-limits-state-court-interference-with-election-laws%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=1958262&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><div class=\"article-content\">\n<p>In a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that limited state courts\u2019 ability to wrest control of elections law from state legislatures in a North Carolina redistricting case. The ruling does not, however, entirely stymie activist attempts to use courts to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/new-scotus-ruling-limits-state-court-interference-with-election-laws\/\" title=\"SCOTUS ruling curbs state court meddling in election laws.\">override elected legislators\u2019 decisions<\/a> about election law.<\/p>\n<p>In Tuesday\u2019s <em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/22pdf\/21-1271_3f14.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Moore v. Harper<\/a><\/em> decision, SCOTUS held that the U.S. Constitution\u2019s elections clause \u201cdoes not vest exclusive and independent authority in state legislatures to set the rules regarding federal elections.\u201d But it also failed to defend state legislatures\u2019 constitutional right to control elections law, including redistricting, as shielded from court review.<\/p>\n<div class=\"fdrlst__b89e9-paragraph-2-long d-flex justify-content-center\" style=\"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center; \" id=\"fdrlst__b89e9-735434897\">\n<div id=\"div-gpt-ad-1379703300879-0\" class=\"mb-30\"><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"fdrlst__b89e9-f4b3cca2e7629c3ea936fe9d54da1480 fdrlst__b89e9-paragraph-2\" id=\"fdrlst__b89e9-f4b3cca2e7629c3ea936fe9d54da1480\"><\/div>\n<p>\u201cFor the first time, the Supreme Court has ruled definitively that there is a limit to the power of state courts to interpret election law,\u201d said Jason Snead, executive director of the Honest Elections Project, in a statement. \u201cToday\u2019s ruling keeps alive the left-wing drive to abuse the courts for partisan gain, but it is no blank check for judges to embrace Marc Elias\u2019 fringe and novel legal theories in order to skew the rules of democracy in favor of the Left.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion and was joined by Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch dissented. Roberts wrote, \u201c[S]tate courts do not have free rein,\u201d even though legislatures are not exempt from \u201cordinary constraints imposed by state law.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cState courts retain the authority to apply state constitutional restraints when legislatures act under the power conferred upon them by the Elections Clause,\u201d Roberts wrote. \u201cBut federal courts must not abandon their own duty to exercise judicial review. In interpreting state law in this area, state courts may not so exceed the bounds of ordinary judicial review as to unconstitutionally intrude upon the role specifically reserved to state legislatures by Article I, Section 4, of the Federal Constitution.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The court\u2019s Tuesday ruling involves a case stemming from North Carolina, where the state Supreme Court threw out a congressional\u00a0map\u00a0drawn by the Republican-controlled legislature following the 2020 census. In its February 2022 ruling, the then-Democrat-majority Supreme Court claimed the map <a href=\"https:\/\/dailycaller.com\/2023\/06\/27\/supreme-court-shoots-down-legal-theory-that-would-have-reshaped-elections\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">represented<\/a> \u201can egregious and intentional partisan gerrymander.\u201d The court also rejected the argument that the U.S. Constitution\u2019s elections clause provides state legislatures the sole authority to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/brace-yourselves-folks-former-biden-aide-predicts-scotus-could-outlaw-black-history\/\" title=\"Ex-Biden Staffer Warns: SCOTUS May Ban Black History\">draw congressional maps<\/a>.<\/p>\n<div class=\"fdrlst__b89e9-3f2e46c92b316e71b852003852ec72d5 fdrlst__b89e9-paragraph-6\" id=\"fdrlst__b89e9-3f2e46c92b316e71b852003852ec72d5\"><\/div>\n<p>In response, the defendants filed an emergency application with SCOTUS and asked the nation\u2019s highest court to issue a stay of the North Carolina Supreme Court decision. While the high court granted certiorari, it denied the defendants\u2019 request for emergency relief. Following the 2022 midterms \u2014 which gave Republicans a majority on the North Carolina Supreme Court \u2014 the Tarheel State\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/supreme-court-to-hear-second-case-challenging-biden-student-loan-forgiveness-program\/\" title=\"Supreme Court To Hear Second Case Challenging Biden Student Loan Forgiveness Program\">highest court agreed<\/a> to rehear the case and, in April, <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2023\/05\/01\/court-rulings-give-north-carolina-and-florida-republicans-major-wins-for-election-integrity\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">overturned<\/a> its previous decision.<\/p>\n<p>While the North Carolina court concluded, as Roberts writes, \u201cthat <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/state-supreme-court-gives-republicans-major-win-in-key-swing-state\/\" title=\"State Supreme Court Gives Republicans Major Win in Key Swing State\">partisan gerrymandering claims<\/a> are justiciable under the North Carolina Constitution,\u201d it did not \u201creinstate the 2021 congressional plans\u201d that were originally struck down. Instead, it provided the General Assembly the power to enact a new set of \u201clegislative and congressional redistricting plans.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The U.S. Constitution, however, indicates that only state legislatures \u2014 not state courts \u2014 have the legitimate power to draw political district maps. Article I, Section 4 states that \u201c[t]he Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In essence, the court majority concluded the judiciary should oversee how state legislatures are allowed to exercise their constitutional duties to draw election maps.<\/p>\n<div class=\"fdrlst__b89e9-34a1c11ed6cc09ac84ca69bb9922d50b fdrlst__b89e9-paragraph-10\" id=\"fdrlst__b89e9-34a1c11ed6cc09ac84ca69bb9922d50b\"><\/div>\n<p>\u201cIn sum, our precedents have long rejected the view that legislative action under the Elections Clause is purely federal in character, governed only by restraints found in the Federal Constitution,\u201d Roberts wrote. \u201cState courts retain the authority to apply state constitutional restraints when legislatures act under the power conferred upon them by the Elections Clause. But federal courts must not abandon their own duty to exercise judicial review.\u201d<\/p>\n<figure class=\"wp-block-embed aligncenter is-type-rich is-provider-twitter wp-block-embed-twitter\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-embed__wrapper\"> <span class=\"y8IiVcG50Qtmhse2vFur1RZWplAnHJxE\"><\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"twitter-tweet\" data-width=\"500\" data-dnt=\"true\">\n<p lang=\"en\" dir=\"ltr\">1. On Moore v Harper (SCOTUS election law ruling): Although this ruling will be hailed as a loss for conservatives, it\u2019s very much a middle-of-the-road decision which says that state courts still have a role to play in interpreting state constitutional provisions\u2026<\/p>\n<p>\u2014 Ilya Shapiro (@ishapiro) <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/ishapiro\/status\/1673707026705154057?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw\">June 27, 2023<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><script async src=\"https:\/\/platform.twitter.com\/widgets.js\" charset=\"utf-8\"><\/script><\/span> <\/div>\n<\/figure>\n[<strong>RELATED: <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2022\/12\/07\/in-moore-v-harper-scotus-could-decide-who-gets-the-final-say-in-a-2024-election-dispute\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">In\u00a0<em>Moore v. Harper<\/em>, SCOTUS Could Decide Who Gets The Final Say In A 2024 Election Dispute<\/a><\/strong>]\n<p>In his dissent, Justice Thomas admonished the majority, arguing their ruling essentially acts as an advisory opinion. He said the \u201cstraightforward case of mootness\u201d shows the suit should have been dismissed. He writes, \u201cBy its own lights, the majority \u2018is acting not as an Article III court\u2019 \u2026 but as an <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/lockdown-for-christmas-britons-avoid-more-holiday-restrictions-for-now\/\" title=\"Lockdown for Christmas? Britons Avoid More Holiday Restrictions\u2026 For Now\">ad hoc branch<\/a> of a state legislature. That is emphatically not our job.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Thomas went on to further criticize the majority for adopting an unspecified standard when it considers state courts to be overstepping their legal bounds, writing that \u201cthe majority\u2019s advice invites questions of the most far-reaching scope.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWhat are \u2018the bounds of ordinary judicial review\u2019? What methods of constitutional interpretation do they allow? Do those methods vary from State to State? And what about <em>stare decisis<\/em>\u2014are federal courts to review state courts\u2019 treatment of their own precedents for some sort of abuse of discretion?\u201d Thomas writes. \u201cThe majority\u2019s framework would seem to require answers to all of these questions and more.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI would hesitate long before committing the Federal Judiciary to this uncertain path,\u201d he concluded.<\/p>\n<div class=\"fdrlst__b89e9-27dccfc287de4c461c9aac26d81ac55c fdrlst__b89e9-after-post-content\" id=\"fdrlst__b89e9-27dccfc287de4c461c9aac26d81ac55c\"><\/div>\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator\">    \t\t\t\t\t   \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In a 6-3 ruling, the US Supreme Court limited state courts&#8217; power to control election laws in a North Carolina redistricting case. However, this decision does not completely hinder activists from using courts to override elected legislators&#8217; decisions on election law. This was seen in Tuesday&#8217;s Moore v. [case name].<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":539,"featured_media":1958263,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[546],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1958262","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-federalist"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1958262","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/539"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1958262"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1958262\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1958263"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1958262"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1958262"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1958262"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}