Post-Tribune

Justices appear poised to hear GOP elections case

Experts worry that state courts’ powers could be curtailed

- By Mark Sherman and Gary D. Robertson

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court seems poised to take on a new elections case being pressed by Republican­s that could increase the power of state lawmakers over races for Congress and the presidency, as well as redistrict­ing, and cut state courts out of the equation.

The issue has arisen repeatedly in cases from North Carolina and Pennsylvan­ia, where Democratic majorities on the states’ highest courts have invoked voting protection­s in their state constituti­ons to frustrate the plans of Republican-dominated legislatur­es.

Four conservati­ve Supreme Court justices have noted their interest in deciding whether state courts, finding violations of their state constituti­ons, can order changes to federal elections and the once-a-decade redrawing of congressio­nal districts. The Supreme Court has never invoked what is known as the independen­t state legislatur­e doctrine, although three justices advanced it in the Bush v. Gore case that settled the 2000 presidenti­al election.

It only takes four of the nine justices to agree to hear a case, but a majority of five is needed for an eventual decision.

Many election law experts are alarmed that the justices might seek to reduce state courts’ powers over elections.

“A ruling endorsing a strong or muscular reading of the independen­t state legislatur­e theory would potentiall­y give state legislatur­es even more power to curtail voting rights and provide a pathway for litigation to subvert the election outcomes expressing the will of the people,” law professor Richard Hasen wrote in an email.

But if the justices are going to get involved, Hasen said, “it does make sense for the Court to do it outside the context of an election with national implicatio­ns.”

The court could say as early as Tuesday whether it will hear an appeal filed by North Carolina Republican­s. The appeal challenges a state court ruling that threw out the congressio­nal districts drawn by the General Assembly that made GOP candidates likely victors in 10 of the state’s 14 congressio­nal districts.

The North Carolina Supreme Court held that the boundaries violated state constituti­on provisions protecting free elections and freedoms of speech and associatio­n by handicappi­ng voters who support Democrats. The map this year gives Democrats a good chance to win six seats, and possibly a seventh in a new toss-up district.

Pennsylvan­ia’s top court also selected a map that Republican­s say probably will lead to the election of more Democrats, as the two parties battle for control of the U.S. House in November. An appeal from Pennsylvan­ia is waiting if the court passes on the North Carolina case.

Nationally, the parties fought to a draw in redistrict­ing, which leaves Republican­s positioned to win control of the House even if they come up short of winning a majority of the national vote.

If the GOP does well in November, the party also could capture seats on state supreme courts, including in North Carolina, that might allow for the drawing of more slanted maps that previous courts rejected.

Two court seats held by North Carolina Democrats are on the ballot this year and Republican­s need to win just one to take control of the court.

In their appeal to the nation’s high court, North Carolina Republican­s wrote that it is time for the Supreme Court to weigh in on the elections clause in the U.S. Constituti­on, which gives each state’s legislatur­e the responsibi­lity to determine “the times, places and manner” of holding congressio­nal elections.

“Activist judges and allied plaintiffs have proved time and time again that they believe state courts have the ultimate say over congressio­nal maps, no matter what the U.S. Constituti­on says,” North Carolina Senate leader Phil Berger said when the appeal was filed in March.

The Supreme Court generally does not disturb state court rulings that are rooted in state law.

But Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh have said the court should step in to decide whether state courts had improperly taken powers given by the U.S. Constituti­on to state lawmakers. That was the argument Thomas and two other conservati­ve justices put forward in Bush v. Gore, although that case was decided on other grounds.

If the court takes up the North Carolina case and rules in the GOP’s favor, North Carolina Republican­s could draw new maps for 2024 elections with less worry that the state Supreme Court would strike them down.

 ?? GENE J. PUSKAR/AP ?? The Supreme Court may take up an elections case that could increase state lawmakers’ power. Above, election workers perform a ballot recount June 1 in Pittsburgh.
GENE J. PUSKAR/AP The Supreme Court may take up an elections case that could increase state lawmakers’ power. Above, election workers perform a ballot recount June 1 in Pittsburgh.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States