Posted on 06/27/2023 7:24:35 AM PDT by mooncoin
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to impose new limits on state courts reviewing certain election-related issues by ruling against Republicans in North Carolina fighting for a congressional district map that would heavily favor their candidates.
The justices ruled on a 6-3 vote that the North Carolina Supreme Court was acting within its authority in concluding that the map constituted a partisan gerrymander under the state constitution.
In doing so, the court declined to embrace a hitherto obscure legal argument called the “independent state legislature” theory, which Republicans say limits state court authority to strike down certain election laws enacted by state legislatures.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
The uncivil rights mess is still a weight around southern states.
So either the Constitution doesn’t mean what it says it means, or the Constitution is not the highest law in the land .....The people on the Supreme Court are.
Some folks are just knee jerk emotional unable to control themselves because every decision not in their favor is not a “win” no matter the law.
~~~~~~~~
What could this possibly mean to someone like you?
~~~~~~~~~~~~
“the times, places, and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives shall be prescribed in each state by the Legislature thereof”
~~~~~~~~~~~~
When did this become official? AFAIK it has NOT happened (yet) and at this rate it's becoming questionable as to whether it ever will.
It’s not an “obscure legal argument.” It’s written into the Constitution.
All these “conservative” justices just keep showing their true colors!!
We are truly doomed!
“Barrett and Kavanaugh are-—disappointments”
_____________________________________
MAJOR, MAJOR disappointments, and the king of disappointment Roberts rounds out the bunch!
Of course was there any doubt? Notice that the rats stick together like boogers they never rule against their base? I despise those POS in DC! I’m at the point that, sorry if you have love ones in DC l, but I’m at the point that I’m even praying that China or Russia drop a nuclear bomb on that piece of chit nasty evil NAZI communist swamp kingdom.
Again, is this decision supported by the U.S. Constitution and if so how?
Again, all Supreme Court decisions must be in compliance and not in violation of the Constitution as written and originally understood and intended.
that is exactly what a plant would say
“Barrett and Kavanaugh are-—disappointments”
That has been obvious for a long time now. Except for one or two cases they are no better than Ginsberg.
If trump gets rejected and has a scotus pic, he should go full pedal to the metal radical conservative
In New Mexico the Dims control both the legislature and the state’s courts and gerrymandered the state to put outnumbered conservative southeastern NM oil producing areas in with the progressives in Santa Fe and the Navajo tribe in northwest New Mexico with the predicted result. With the state supreme court in Dim hands there is no direct relief. However, depending on how the ruling reads, there could be relief in federal court for overreaching legislative action in this area. I imagine lawyer Pubs in NM are examining the ruling to see if any of it could be applicable to our situation.
Agreed. “Should be checks and balances “.
How come this never stops democrats, then.
They were good on Roe vs Wade.
Dont want to hear from President Trump about his magnificent selection of SCOTUS justices. They all stab us in the back somehow and sometimes in selective moments. As for DemoRats and RINO’s - may they inherit the shiite they vote for with compounding interest. Let them feel the pain they choose.
Of course it does. Plenty of courts have ruled against proposed Democrat redistricting plans in the past.
Here’s a few:
“This kills off gerrymandering...”
I think I see a fatal flaw in your plan. Democrats could just all legally have their names changed so that they would be majorities in 2 out of 3 of the seats, while letting the Republicans have 100% of the 3rd one.
I don’t think districts should be drawn or twisted in any way based on “demographics” or voting patterns. The constitution is only supposed to recognize one thing - a citizen. No hyphens allowed.
However, there is some pretty compelling math that this actually benefits the republican party in some states AND at worst it is a statistical wash in others.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.