Supreme Court ruling protects electoral democracy
By Noah Feldman / Bloomberg Opinion
In a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court firmly rejected the so-called independent state legislature theory. This bizarre theory would have allowed renegade legislators to violate their state constitutions in setting rules for federal elections, allowing them to influence elections for U.S. Congress and even the presidency.
The ruling was a vote to protect the democratic process, one of the Supreme Court’s most important jobs. It’s hard to overstate how important it is that this court is prepared to fulfill that duty.
The decision in the case, Moore v. Harper, was written by Chief Justice John Roberts. It was joined not only by the court’s three liberals but also by Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. That too is significant. By joining the opinion, Kavanaugh and Barrett showed that, notwithstanding their undoubted conservatism, they are not going to be radical revolutionaries when it comes to the basic structure of democratic elections. Sadly, the same cannot be said for the dissenters, Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito.
When the case was argued, it relied on extreme literalism. The U.S. Constitution says that it’s up to state legislatures to specify the time, place and manner of congressional and presidential elections. Based on that language, the petitioners in the case asserted that a state supreme court — applying the state constitution and state laws — lacked the authority under the federal Constitution to strike down unlawful action by the state legislature. Their theory was that since the Constitution says that the state legislature is in charge, the state supreme court can’t intervene, no matter what.
https://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/comment-supreme-court-ruling-protects-electoral-democracy/
= new reply since forum marked as read
We can fly higher than an eagle
he is the wind beneath our democracy,,,