The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision on Tuesday, has turned down a critical legal theory that would have significantly influenced the dynamics of future elections.
In the case of Moore v. Harper, the court refused the “independent state legislature theory.”
This theory proposed that the Constitution allows state legislatures unbridled authority in conducting federal elections, which would be exempt from any scrutiny from state courts.
The Court’s ruling originates from the North Carolina Supreme Court’s February 2022 decision.
It had invalidated a congressional map designed by the state’s Republican-led legislature following the 2020 census.
The court condemned the map as “an egregious and intentional partisan gerrymander.”
In response to this, the Supreme Court expressed that the Constitution’s Elections Clause “does not vest exclusive and independent authority in state legislatures to set the rules regarding federal elections.”
The verdict was penned by Chief Justice John Roberts, with Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, and Ketani Brown Jackson in agreement.
Roberts stated that “State courts retain the authority to apply state constitutional restraints when legislatures act under the power conferred upon them by the Elections Clause.”
He continued: “But 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.”
However, the Supreme Court did not make a decision on whether the North Carolina Supreme Court overstepped its authority in accordance with the Elections Clause.
Instead, it upheld the judgement of the state supreme court.
Recently, the North Carolina Supreme Court revoked its 2022 ruling on April 28, The Daily Caller notes.
It acknowledged its lack of authority to examine the map under the state constitution.
Subsequently, the Biden administration suggested the case be dismissed as moot.
Despite this, the legislatures insisted that the court still needed to pass judgement, since the state court had not addressed the federal “independent state legislature” issue, which was likely to be brought before the Supreme Court again.
Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Samuel Alito were in opposition to the majority verdict.
Thomas contended that the case was “indisputably moot,” considering the reversal by the North Carolina Supreme Court.
He criticized the majority judgement as “plainly advisory.”
