The US Supreme Court agreed in June to hear the Moore vs. Harper case related to the subject referred to as the independent state legislature theory.
This case will have huge consequences.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear a case next term to potentially bolster the elections power of state legislatures.
The high court announced it would take up the case, known as Moore vs. Harper, brought by North Carolina’s Republican state House speaker who has challenged the state Supreme Court’s decision to dismiss the legislature’s congressional maps that would have given the party an advantage through partisan gerrymandering.
The North Carolina Supreme Court in February ruled that the legislative maps, which gave Republicans as many as 11 safe districts compared to just three for Democrats, violated the state’s constitution in a 4-3 decision.
In March, the U.S. high court turned back efforts by Republicans to nullify new congressional maps approved by state court for this year’s midterm elections.
The left is freaking out about this case, perhaps because it is relevant to the corrupt actions taken by states before the 2020 Election. In Georgia for example, the state’s corrupt GOP Secretary of State signed an agreement with Hillary Clinton’s attorney, Marc Elias, that provided for drop boxes in the state. Only the legislature has the ability to change laws related to elections, per the independent state legislature theory.
The Supreme Court in Pennsylvania ruled that absentee ballots were fine in the 2020 Election, the way they were managed was against what the legislature had passed as law.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court also allowed ballots to be received in the 2020 Election up to three days after the election. Millions of ballots were processed during this time. It was not something that Pennsylvania’s legislature ever put in place.
The far-left Guardian reported.
The case, Moore v Harper, involves a dispute over North Carolina’s congressional districts. At the heart of the case is what has come to be known as the independent state legislature theory (ISL) – the idea that state legislatures cannot be checked by state supreme courts when it comes to setting rules for federal elections, even if the legislature’s actions violate the state’s constitution. It’s an idea that three justices – William Rehnquist, Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia – mused about in Bush v Gore, but has gained little traction since. The decision to hear the case immediately raised serious alarm from experts, who say the idea is anti-democratic and is antithetical to federalism and the separation of powers at the heart of American government.
The Washington Examiner says the Supreme Court decision, in this case, is not expected till next spring. Others believe it may be this fall.
The AP noted that the case impacts the manner in which Democrat courts have acted to take over election laws in several states.
But the North Carolina case has implications far beyond redistricting, The independent state legislative doctrine could also hold that state courts cannot stop legislatures from imposing any restrictions they want on congressional voting or even the selection of electors who choose the president of the United States.
In the 2020 Election in Wisconsin, attorney Karen Mueller sued because she felt that drop boxes were created in the state without the legislature voting which went against the state’s constitution. Although her case was initially thrown out by Democrat Supreme Court Justices and a RINO justice in the state, a more recent decision by the state Supreme Court agreed that the drop boxes were illegal in the state.
The independent state legislature theory would prevent actions by radical actors from taking place. This is very important for the future of our repubic.
We will see what the US Supreme Court decides.