{"id":54108,"date":"2022-11-02T15:44:14","date_gmt":"2022-11-02T22:44:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/?p=54108"},"modified":"2022-11-02T15:44:14","modified_gmt":"2022-11-02T22:44:14","slug":"the-single-most-important-case-on-american-democracy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lapost.us\/?p=54108","title":{"rendered":"The Single Most Important Case on American Democracy"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
By<\/span>Mark Hedin<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\"\"<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n

Image via Flickr<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

Across the political spectrum, an upcoming Supreme Court case has observers worried about the fate of the U.S. political system.<\/p>\n

In the narrowest sense, Moore v. Harper,\u00a0scheduled to be heard Dec. 7<\/a>, is about whether or not the North Carolina Supreme Court \u2013 or the governor, or anybody else \u2013 has the authority to tell the state legislature, currently GOP-dominated in North Carolina, that new political district maps it passed are unconstitutional and need to be redrawn.<\/p>\n

But even conservative-leaning individuals and organizations are alarmed by the Moore litigants\u2019 argument that only the state legislature can decide how elections of any kind are conducted in individual states.<\/p>\n

If the Supreme Court should rule in favor of their so-called \u201cindependent state legislature theory,\u201d said Kathay Feng, national redistricting director for the democracy watchdog organization Common Cause, \u201cwe could see 200 years of legal precedent wiped out and federal elections throughout our country upended.\u201d<\/p>\n

Feng was speaking at\u00a0a press briefing Oct. 27<\/a>\u00a0organized by Common Cause with the Southern Coalition for Social Justice. Joining Feng were SCSJ co-executive director Allison Riggs and J. Michael Luttig, a longtime federal appellate judge, popular in conservative circles and appointed by President George H.W. Bush.<\/p>\n

The issue, as the speakers described it, is that the case threatens to disrupt the \u201cbalance of powers\u201d concept baked into the country\u2019s founding. Having three co-equal branches of government \u2013 the executive, legislative and judicial \u2013 creates a system of \u201cchecks and balances\u201d that keep any one branch from going too far.<\/p>\n

Luttig calls it \u201cthe single most important case on American democracy, and for American democracy, in the nation\u2019s history since the founding almost 250 years ago.\u201d<\/p>\n

The case arose in 2021, when Common Cause and other plaintiffs challenged the North Carolina redistricting results. The state, whose populace is closely divided between Democrats and Republicans, had gained a 14th<\/sup>\u00a0seat in Congress thanks to population growth documented in the 2020 Census.<\/p>\n

But the proposed new political boundaries of those 14 congressional districts, as drawn by the GOP-dominated state legislature, were heavily \u201cgerrymandered,\u201d giving the Republican Party a distinct advantage in 10, the Democrats the advantage in three, and leaving only one likely open to competition.<\/p>\n

The North Carolina Supreme Court agreed that the maps should be redrawn.<\/p>\n

But the General Assembly \u2013 the state senate and house \u00a0\u2013 resisted adopting maps the court found acceptable, instead appealing to the Supreme Court based on the, as Feng referred to it, \u201clawless legislature\u201d theory of a state legislature having no constraints on its authority over election procedures.<\/p>\n

The U.S. Supreme Court did not grant the state\u2019s request to toss the court-approved Congressional district map for this election, but the map for state legislature districts drawn by the state legislature was allowed to stand, and three justices expressed an \u201cinterest\u201d in the ISL theory and the court agreed to revisit the matter.<\/p>\n

Clarence Thomas did not share his thoughts, but his record in Bush v. Gore and the addition of newly seated Justice Amy Barrett, who did not participate in the decision, has observers concerned about what the court may ultimately decide.<\/p>\n

The ruling will come with hundreds of new state voting rules already enacted nationwide, and in time to affect the next presidential election.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe framers knew that state legislatures only exist because state constitutions created them and that the power to create state constitutions lies with the people,\u201d Riggs said.<\/p>\n

To create a \u201cgovernment that would resist authoritarianism, create healthy checks and balances and ultimately be politically responsive to the people itself,\u201d she said, \u201cthe ability of courts to check legislative bodies for compliance with the Constitution is a very important part of that.\u201d<\/p>\n

But, Riggs said, \u201cThis is not a partisan issue\u201d and cited the diversity of 47 \u201camicus\u201d briefs filed in support of the North Carolina Supreme Court\u2019s role in safeguarding elections.<\/p>\n

\u201cI was so filled with awe and gratitude as I looked through the bipartisan list of these amazing, brave individuals, whose commitment and character and dedication to preserving our democracy was what motivated them,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

\u201cAll of them to a \u2018T\u2019 said that this \u2026 theory is not what the Constitution mandates. \u2026 It is not good for our democracy, and it\u2019s a dangerous road, should the court go down it.\u201d<\/p>\n

Among the \u201camicus\u201d petitioners:<\/p>\n