SCOTUS Case About Excluding Judges From Electoral Redistricting Will Proceed, Lawyer for GOP Says

The U.S. Supreme Court case which could recognize state legislatures’ ability to regulate federal elections without interference by state courts will continue, even though a recent action of the high court suggested it might drop the case. The prediction was made by The Epoch Times by the top Republican lawyer.

Republican Tim Moore, speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives, is asking the high court to recognize that state legislatures have preeminent authority under the U.S. Constitution to make the rules for presidential and congressional elections without state courts getting involved in the process.

The Elections Clause, Article I of U.S. Constitution, states in part: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof[.]”

It is the controversial and elusive doctrine of independent state legislatures, under which Republicans argue the Constitution has always explicitly authorized state legislatures to create rules for federal elections in their respective states.

Democrats argue that this doctrine is a fringe conservative legal idea that could compromise voting rights, encourage partisan redistricting and cause chaos in the electoral process. Conservatives, however, believe the doctrine is derived form the plain text Constitution. It would restore reasonable rules on electoral play and allow elected state officials to make election laws instead of judges.

The Moore v. Harper case is currently being considered by the justices. This follows a marathon oral argument session that The Epoch Times held on December 7, 2022. reported At the moment.

Moore is appealing an order by the then-Democratic-dominated Supreme Court of North Carolina redrawing the state’s electoral map against the wishes of the state’s Republican-majority legislature.

A state court ruled that the map was unlawfully biased against Democratic Party voters. The state’s seven U.S. House district are now controlled by Republicans. The seven remaining districts are controlled by Democrats.

The justices were still in the process of deciding the case. However, the Supreme Court of North Carolina, now with a Republican majority, decided on Feb. 3, to rehear it. This move could have a significant impact on the U.S. Supreme Court case. Harper v. Hall will be reheard by the Supreme Court of North Carolina on March 14.

This led to the U.S. Supreme Court being created. Sign On March 2, it announced that it was considering dropping the case. It ordered the litigants that they file supplemental briefs before March 20 to address whether the court still has jurisdiction to decide the case.

The Epoch Times received an email exchange from David H. Thompson, a lead attorney representing the North Carolina Republicans. He stated that he believed the case would be resolved.

“We are confident the United States Supreme Court continues to retain jurisdiction in this important case,” Thompson said.

Thompson answered questions and stated that he believed that the High Court would reject to declare the case void and refrain from issuing an opinion on its merits.

“Yes, we are confident the case is not moot,” He stated.

Maryland’s Attorney Ed Hartman represented Dan Cox, a Republican candidate for Maryland governor, in a case similar to the one just recently.

Hartman took part in a challenge against a Maryland state court order. Hartman claimed that the order unconstitutionally interfered the Maryland legislature’s powers by allowing the counting of mail ballots early in the November 2022 elections. The U.S. Supreme Court denied Cox’s request for a hearing on February 21. It did so in an unsigned order, without providing any reasons. reported.

Hartman stated that the U.S. Supreme Court could continue Moore v. Harper, regardless of North Carolina’s rulings. Hartman spoke to The Epoch Times in a recent interview.

The high court could decide, “‘well, it doesn’t matter anymore because that election concluded and we’re not going to redo it,’ but, of course, the same question will come up every two years,” He stated.

“I can see this issue coming up again, whether it be in North Carolina or any other state because it is the very same issue that happened here in Maryland, which is that the judiciary decided on how the elections should be held, whether it’s through approving their own redistricting map, or in our case, suspending election rules on how and when to count absentee ballots.”

“And that’s just not the courts’ role,” Hartman stated.

The Epoch Times asked for comment from the attorneys representing the other side of the Moore v. Harper case. The U.S. Department of Justice did not respond.