20 Democratic Senators Ask Supreme Court to Reject Once-Fringe Theory in Elections Case

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Source: New York Times

A group of 20 Democratic senators filed a brief on Wednesday urging the Supreme Court to reject a legal argument that would give state legislatures extraordinary power over federal elections.

The brief, filed by Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, draws parallels to the checks and balances of the federal government — especially Congress — as a clear indication that the so-called independent state legislature theory runs afoul of the Constitution.

The senators argue that while the Constitution grants state legislatures the responsibility of setting the time, location and manner of federal elections, the Constitution also requires state legislatures to follow the same procedures when making rules for federal elections that they use to make other state laws. The clause, they write, “does not allow state legislatures to bypass the same restrictions imposed by state constitutions — the very documents that create and empower them.”

Once considered a fringe argument found only in the far reaches of conservative legal thought, the independent state legislature theory is now at the center of a redistricting case in North Carolina before the Supreme Court. Set to be heard in December, that case, Moore v. Harper, involves a congressional map drawn by the Republican-led legislature that was rejected by the state’s Supreme Court as a partisan gerrymander. Republican lawmakers sued, arguing that the court had no authority to reject the map. The North Carolina Republicans have argued that the clause means state legislatures alone are responsible for drawing congressional districts, and the courts have no role to play.



Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/20-democratic-senators-ask-supreme-court-to-reject-once-fringe-theory-in-elections-case/ar-AA13ouLb

[Frasier Balzov]

1. The Elections Clause was not intended to dictate electoral outcomes

or to favor or disfavor a class of candidates.

If legislatures are doing this, then judicial review is necessary and desirable.

[NullTuples]

2. Roberts Court: You really don't understand why we're here, do you?

Sorry, I should have spelled that, "Federalist Society Roberts Supreme Court".

[BlueIdaho]

3. Not Supreme Court

Extreme Court.

[emulatorloo]

4. These days Roberts is the sane one of the Republicans. Voted against overturning Roe v Wade.

It has unfortunately turned in to the Alito middle ages Christian court.

[DBoon]

5. I expect something like this is a future court argument

Peasant 1: We have found a witch, may we burn her?
(cheers)
Vladimir: How do you known she is a witch?
P2: She looks like one!
V: Bring her forward
(advance)
Woman: I'm not a witch! I'm not a witch!
V: ehh... but you are dressed like one.
W: They dressed me up like this!
All: naah no we didn't... no.
W: And this isn't my nose, it's a false one.
(V lifts up carrot)
V: Well?
P1: Well we did do the nose
V: The nose?
P1: ...And the hat, but she is a witch!
(all: yeah, burn her burn her!)
V: Did you dress her up like this?
P1: No! (no no... no) Yes. (yes yeah) a bit (a bit bit a bit) But she has got a wart!
(P3 points at wart)
V: What makes you think she is a witch?
P2: Well, she turned me into a newt!

[Farmer-Rick]

11. There's always a Monty Python skit

That illustrates our dystopian politics.

[NullTuples]

6. Arguably, the cornerstone of today was Citizens United

[MayReasonRule]

14. America's Spanish Inquisition Y'all Qaeda Style

The sitting majority of SCOTUS and the GOP are Nat-C Fascists through and through.

They have three major planks in their nefarious agenda, intimidation, incarceration, and/or extermination of any and all that dare oppose their ongoing depraved crimes against humanity.

Here's the lay of the land from what I've observed.

Moore v. Harper is scary as fuck.

If you thought the Dodd abortion ruling unleashed nationwide depravity...

Moore v. Harper would allow state legislatures to null and void your vote. It would allow state legislatures to send their chosen electors, not the chosen electors of the people.

Justices Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch:

"[The Elections Clause] |could have said that these rules are to be prescribed “by each State,” which would have left it up to each State to decide which branch, component, or officer of the state government should exercise that power, as States are generally free to allocate state power as they choose. But that is not what the Elections Clause says. Its language specifies a particular organ of a state government, and we must take that language seriously."

They laid it out bare. There it is. The I.S.L.T. (Independent State Legislature Theory) already has three votes in favor of destroying our republic.

That means in order for any modicum of reason to rule, between Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Coney Barrett, two of the three have to vote against the theory.

With a Nat-C Fascist SCOTUS, all the laws we have lived with for 250 years are being wiped away.

May reason rule.

[MayReasonRule]

10. It's no longer SCOTUS...

It's Y'all Qaeda's Americanized Spanish Inquisition...

Six of the nine are Nat-C Fascists.

They no longer clutch their pearls, they just reach under their robes, grab their genitalia, and issue their opinions right out of their asses...

[Mz Pip]

7. Then why hold elections?

What’s the point of even bothering with having the citizens vote if the the legislature can decide it doesn’t like the outcome?

[Farmer-Rick]

12. Yeah, when the supremes grabbed power not given to them

In the Constitution, they became little kings.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it give that court the right to determine constitutionality of laws and legislation.

Constitutionality is to be determined by we the people. Not by 9 unelected judges. It goes against all the checks and balances of the Constitution. It gives ultimate control to unelected ideologies.

[mahina]

8. Should be 80 bipartisan but I'll take it. I trust Amy to do the best that can be done.

[OldBaldy1701E]

9. Hmmm

The North Carolina Republicans have argued that the clause means state legislatures alone are responsible for drawing congressional districts, and the courts have no role to play.

Wow. I suppose being this blatant when it comes to longing for total dictatorship was inevitable. The question is: what are the good people of my home state going to do about this?

[FBaggins]

13. I doubt that they'll rule for the fringe theory

They can give republicans a win without it - particularly if we are unable to hold the NC supreme court in the coming election.

More likely - I think they'll rule that state supreme courts can of course interpret the state constitution in a way that invalidates new district lines... but they can't then replace them with their own lines. Or perhaps "can't replace them with their own lines" for more than one election cycle.