The Supreme Court rejected a radical argument put forth by North Carolina Republicans that sought to give nearly unfettered power over federal elections to state legislatures, with Chief Justice John Roberts and fellow conservative Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett joining the court’s three liberals to rule on Tuesday that the claims had no merit.
Had the court accepted the GOP’s claims, it would have upended the foundations of over two centuries of constitutional law. Such an outcome would have enabled new gerrymanders in several states and a torrent of Republican-backed voter suppression in many more ahead of the 2024 elections. In a worst-case scenario, it could have even allowed Republicans to rig the Electoral College heading into next year.
The case, known as Moore v. Harper, instead marks the second time this month that the court has rejected a far-right bid to solidify GOP gerrymandering and voting restrictions that discriminate against voters of color. Earlier in June, the court unexpectedly upheld a key part of the Voting Rights Act in a redistricting case regarding discrimination against Black voters in Alabama.
Republicans here had appealed a decision from the North Carolina Supreme Court, which until this year had a Democratic majority. That majority had struck down the congressional map that Republicans had drawn following the 2020 census on the grounds that it violated the state constitution as an illegal partisan gerrymander.
The GOP then appealed to the United States Supreme Court to have its map reinstated, advancing a breathtaking doctrine known as the “independent state legislature theory.” This theory, had it been embraced by the Supreme Court, would strip state courts of any power to enforce any provisions in their state constitutions that would limit legislators’ ability to pass laws governing federal elections.