The Supreme Court on Wednesday appeared to search for a middle path in an election law clash with weighty stakes for American democracy involving a bid by North Carolina GOP lawmakers to reinstate a Republican-drawn voting map.
Questions posed during three hours of oral argument suggested there was not a majority of justices eager to embrace a sweeping legal theory advanced by Republican state lawmakers that would give near-total authority to state legislatures to design congressional districts and shape the rules governing federal elections in the states.
Instead, some of the court’s conservative justices seemed to favor an outcome that would preserve some role — though perhaps a diminished one — for state courts and constitutions in regulating federal elections.
“You suggest that there’s a ‘narrower alternative ground’ to decide the case in your favor, which would allow some substantive state restrictions to be enforced,” Chief Justice John Roberts asked David Thompson, who represented North Carolina’s legislative leaders. “Could you articulate what that is?”
Conservative Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett also posed questions that seemed to reflect an interest in a ruling that would stop short of completely insulating state legislatures from state-level constraints in carrying out federal elections.
In concrete terms, the case argued Wednesday was an appeal of a ruling by North Carolina’s top court that ordered a new congressional map to be drawn after finding the GOP’s version violated the state constitution due to its pro-Republican skew.
But the dispute’s broader implications for the future of U.S. democracy has seized national attention.
The North Carolina Republicans’ maximalist argument is that because state legislatures’ power to regulate federal elections comes directly from the U.S. constitution, legislatures need not follow voter protections built into state constitutions.
Voters and voting rights groups, for their part, urged the justices not to foreclose a role for state courts and constitutions and election administrators in regulating federal elections.
Updated at 1:53 p.m.
Source: The Hill
How Florida Beat New York
Tennis: Nick Kyrgios boasts $5,000 bet
Why Hasn’t Putin Used Nuclear Weapons?
The Hill’s Morning Report — Republicans probe for liberal conspiracy, corruption
The Affordable Makeup Tool That Beauty Influencers Use Is on Sale Now
11 Trainer-Approved Exercise Cues That Will Make Your Favorite Moves Even More Effective
17 Best Plus-Size Lingerie Brands to Try Right Now: Savage X Fenty, Playful Promises, AdoreMe
14 Best Vacuum Sealers, According to Food Experts in 2023
9 Life Lessons I Learned From Being Sidelined With Injuries
What Is Cold Plunging and Does It Have Benefits for Your Body?
Remember in ‘That ’70s Show’ When Red and Kitty Get High? They Shot That Scene ‘a Bazillion Times’
Amid Strong Labor Market, State And Local Governments Struggle To Hire
The geopolitical significance of Marcos Jr’s visit to Japan
Meta Platforms Stock Jumped 29% In One Week, What’s Next?
AI Cyber Solutions Positioning To Better Secure Web3
Sport18 hours ago
TikTok star, North Carolina college football player honors mother by supporting women fighting cancer
Travel19 hours ago
Six sensational Ladies’ Nights to enjoy at Yas Marina
Sport19 hours ago
Jets’ Sauce Gardner teases that he knows ‘a little something about something’ on Aaron Rodgers situation
Sport19 hours ago
Ibrahimovic trains for first time in EIGHT MONTHS and could play against Torino
News18 hours ago
No One With a Functioning Brain Sees the GOP as the ‘Party of Normal’
Finance23 hours ago
Merge Or Perish: 25 Struggling Fintech Startups
Auto19 hours ago
2024 Toyota Tacoma TRD Pro Rendered Based On Patent Images
Travel22 hours ago
Choice Hotels and Radisson Hotels Americas Unite to Offer Seamless Rewards to Members