Nullifying the Constitution is the Left's goal. Why Moore v. Harper Terrifies Democrats

[rangerrebew]

MONDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2022
Nullifying the Constitution is the Left's goal
Why Moore v. Harper Terrifies Democrats
 https://spectator.org/why-moore-v-harper-terrifies-democrats/

The U.S. Supreme Court finally heard oral arguments in Moore v. Harper last week. The case involves a mundane constitutional issue concerning the definition of “legislature” as used in the elections clause. Yet it has produced panic among Democrats and a torrent of portentous predictions about the death of democracy from various leftist law professors. In the Washington Post, for example, Harvard University’s Noah Feldman expressed alarm that the court took up the “insane” case at all.

Is Moore v. Harper really insane? Of course not. The case arose early this year when the North Carolina Supreme Court struck down a redistricting map produced by the state Legislature, then replaced it with a redistricting scheme of its own. The North Carolina General Assembly petitioned SCOTUS for relief on the grounds that this action violated Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution. Moreover, the petitioners are on solid legal ground, as constitutional lawyers David Rivkin Jr. and Andrew Grossman explain in the Wall Street Journal:

The Elections Clause directs “the legislature” to regulate congressional elections, which includes drawing district maps. State courts aren’t part of the legislative process, and thus the North Carolina Supreme Court was obligated to uphold the General Assembly’s map.… State courts have the power to interpret election regulations, but they can’t override the legislature’s handiwork unless it conflicts with the U.S. Constitution or a statute enacted by Congress.

http://commonsensewonder.blogspot.com/2022/12/nullifying-constitution-is-lefts-goal.html

[Bigun]

It's really too bad that SCOTUS refused to do their duty in 2020 while more states still had Republican legislatures.

[Free Vulcan]

If they rule in favor of state legislatures, this thing could be a silent nuke.

How many times have we seen judges and/or election boards negate the rules the state legislature has laid down to give the Democrats the advantage right before the election?

Drop boxes in Wisconsin come to mind.

[Bigun]

If they rule in favor of state legislatures, this thing could be a silent nuke.

How many times have we seen judges and/or election boards negate the rules the state legislature has laid down to give the Democrats the advantage right before the election?

Drop boxes in Wisconsin come to mind.

  But it would have been nice for them to do while the Republican legislatures were still in place @Free Vulcan

Heading into the election, Democrats controlled 36 chambers and Republicans controlled 62. A bipartisan coalition controlled the Alaska House.

As a result of the election:

Democrats gained control of four chambers—the Michigan House and Senate, Minnesota Senate, and Pennsylvania House—bringing their total to 40.[1] Wins in Minnesota and Michigan created new Democratic trifectas in those states. Both had previously been divided governments.
A bipartisan coalition gained control of the Alaska State Senate.
Republicans lost control of those five chambers, bringing their total to 57.


https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results...te_legislatures

My point being that if SCOTUS had heard Texas vs Pennsylvania in 2020 as the constitution required them to do those republican losses likely would not have occurred, Republiicans would likely have gained seats, and Moore vs Harper would have really been something!

[roamer_1]

If they rule in favor of state legislatures, this thing could be a silent nuke.

How many times have we seen judges and/or election boards negate the rules the state legislature has laid down to give the Democrats the advantage right before the election?

Drop boxes in Wisconsin come to mind.

It does not even touch that sort of thing.
The Legislature Assembled has standing, without a doubt, against the Carolina court. THEY are saying 'that ain't what we said'... And since they can prove it, it's a no brainer.

That ain't the problem.