Utopia Talk - Politics - Moore v. Harper

Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Thu Apr 18 05:33:49 2024

Utopia Talk / Politics / Moore v. Harper

Jesse Malcolm Barack
Member Wed Jul 06 13:59:08
http://www...tate-legislature-case-1376618/

Supreme Court to Rule on Whether Republican State Legislatures Can Rig Elections

The Supreme Court couldn’t manage to end its disastrous summer session without promising more horrors to come.

The highest court in the land announced on Thursday that it will determine this fall whether state legislatures can conduct elections as they see fit, regardless of whether they are in violation of the state constitution and free of oversight of state courts.

The case in question, Moore v. Harper, was brought by Republicans in North Carolina after the state’s Supreme Court rejected their bid to gerrymander the congressional map in the party’s favor. State Supreme Courts have also recently rejected maps drawn by Republicans in Pennsylvania, and Democrats in New York and Maryland, as The Washington Post points out. North Carolina Republicans are arguing that their map should have been allowed to stand, citing the “independent state legislature” theory, which holds that state legislatures can essentially do whatever they want when it comes to federal elections.

If the Supreme Court to rule in the North Carolina GOP’s favor this fall, Republican-controlled legislatures across the country (there are 30 of them, compared to 20 controlled by Democrats) could have free rein not only to chop up congressional maps, but to implement a bevy of other voter restrictions with little to no oversight. Republicans in Pennsylvania, for instance, including GOP gubernatorial nominee Doug Mastriano, have proposed throwing out voter rolls and requiring every citizen to re-register to vote. Voter ID, eliminating early or mail-in voting, and other restrictive measures have been floated elsewhere.

Republicans would have a far easier time implementing some of these measures if they didn’t have to deal with the pesky inconvenience of their state constitutions.

There’s one other pretty significant way in which the power of state legislatures has been debated lately: Trump’s scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election was predicated upon conservative state legislatures appointing alternate slates of electors declaring him the winner despite the state’s citizens voting for President Biden. It’s unclear to what extent a favorable ruling from the Supreme Court this fall might allow Republicans to orchestrate a similar scheme in 2024. It certainly wouldn’t hurt their chances, though.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) expressed alarm at the court’s decision to take up the case, and what it could mean for future elections. “We are witnessing a judicial coup in process,” she tweeted. “If the President and Congress do not restrain the Court now, the Court is signaling they will come for the Presidential election next. All our leaders — regardless of party — must recognize this Constitutional crisis for what it is.”

Habebe
Member Wed Jul 06 14:17:52
Atleast the Democratic state legislatures won't abuse their authority.

Like how they wouldn't ban opposition parties for no reason.Or rig primaries with the legal defense that they dont owe anyone a fair election.

Jesse Malcolm Barack
Member Wed Jul 06 14:28:48
It was the same shizz trump was saying when he put up his fake electors

http://www...urn-elections/?sh=71ab18f947dd

The theory was also repeatedly used by former President Donald Trump and his allies in post-election lawsuits as legal justification to overturn the 2020 presidential election results, arguing the election was unfairly decided and so should be left to state legislatures—which were controlled by Republicans—to instead decide themselves.

"That legal argument was completely unsuccessful during the 2020 election, with a Trump-appointed judge in Wisconsin ruling it was “contrary both to the plain meaning of the Constitutional text and common sense.”"

Habebe
Member Wed Jul 06 15:01:25
Its called independant state legislature doctrine. It was the prevailing legal doctrine until the early 1900s.

Basically only the elected state officials in the legislature and federal congress set the rules of federal elections.

Instead of state constitutions, state supreme courts and un elected commissions.

The democratic controlled federal Congress can still set regulations.

show deleted posts

Jesse Malcolm Barack Member	Wed Jul 06 13:59:08 http://www...tate-legislature-case-1376618/ Supreme Court to Rule on Whether Republican State Legislatures Can Rig Elections The Supreme Court couldn’t manage to end its disastrous summer session without promising more horrors to come. The highest court in the land announced on Thursday that it will determine this fall whether state legislatures can conduct elections as they see fit, regardless of whether they are in violation of the state constitution and free of oversight of state courts. The case in question, Moore v. Harper, was brought by Republicans in North Carolina after the state’s Supreme Court rejected their bid to gerrymander the congressional map in the party’s favor. State Supreme Courts have also recently rejected maps drawn by Republicans in Pennsylvania, and Democrats in New York and Maryland, as The Washington Post points out. North Carolina Republicans are arguing that their map should have been allowed to stand, citing the “independent state legislature” theory, which holds that state legislatures can essentially do whatever they want when it comes to federal elections. If the Supreme Court to rule in the North Carolina GOP’s favor this fall, Republican-controlled legislatures across the country (there are 30 of them, compared to 20 controlled by Democrats) could have free rein not only to chop up congressional maps, but to implement a bevy of other voter restrictions with little to no oversight. Republicans in Pennsylvania, for instance, including GOP gubernatorial nominee Doug Mastriano, have proposed throwing out voter rolls and requiring every citizen to re-register to vote. Voter ID, eliminating early or mail-in voting, and other restrictive measures have been floated elsewhere. Republicans would have a far easier time implementing some of these measures if they didn’t have to deal with the pesky inconvenience of their state constitutions. There’s one other pretty significant way in which the power of state legislatures has been debated lately: Trump’s scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election was predicated upon conservative state legislatures appointing alternate slates of electors declaring him the winner despite the state’s citizens voting for President Biden. It’s unclear to what extent a favorable ruling from the Supreme Court this fall might allow Republicans to orchestrate a similar scheme in 2024. It certainly wouldn’t hurt their chances, though. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) expressed alarm at the court’s decision to take up the case, and what it could mean for future elections. “We are witnessing a judicial coup in process,” she tweeted. “If the President and Congress do not restrain the Court now, the Court is signaling they will come for the Presidential election next. All our leaders — regardless of party — must recognize this Constitutional crisis for what it is.”
Habebe Member	Wed Jul 06 14:17:52 Atleast the Democratic state legislatures won't abuse their authority. Like how they wouldn't ban opposition parties for no reason.Or rig primaries with the legal defense that they dont owe anyone a fair election.
Jesse Malcolm Barack Member	Wed Jul 06 14:28:48 It was the same shizz trump was saying when he put up his fake electors http://www...urn-elections/?sh=71ab18f947dd The theory was also repeatedly used by former President Donald Trump and his allies in post-election lawsuits as legal justification to overturn the 2020 presidential election results, arguing the election was unfairly decided and so should be left to state legislatures—which were controlled by Republicans—to instead decide themselves. "That legal argument was completely unsuccessful during the 2020 election, with a Trump-appointed judge in Wisconsin ruling it was “contrary both to the plain meaning of the Constitutional text and common sense.”"
Habebe Member	Wed Jul 06 15:01:25 Its called independant state legislature doctrine. It was the prevailing legal doctrine until the early 1900s. Basically only the elected state officials in the legislature and federal congress set the rules of federal elections. Instead of state constitutions, state supreme courts and un elected commissions. The democratic controlled federal Congress can still set regulations.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: