(WatchDogReport.org) – Based on the results of the 2020 Census, North Carolina gained one seat in the United States House of Representatives, which means the state legislature had to draw up a new districting map, which it did. Democratic voters and activists sued, and the state supreme court invalidated the new setup, saying it was illegal gerrymandering. Recently, there was an interesting development in this matter involving Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
The Republican legislators appealed the state court ruling, and the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) just held oral arguments in the case of Moore v. Harper, where the lawyer representing the liberal litigants, Neil Katyal, decided he would challenge Justice Thomas by attempting to use his words from a much older case to sway his opinion in this one.
Moore v. Harper has the unhappy distinction of being the subject of more political and media distortion than any Supreme Court case in recent memory.https://t.co/AHHkiYEBPy
— Jason Willick (@jawillick) December 9, 2022
Katyal referred back to the SCOTUS ruling in Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board, which concerned the counting of votes in the 2000 presidential election between George W. Bush and Al Gore, which contained a quote from a 1940 case. He reminded the court that in its 2000 decision, justices relied on the statement that “it is fundamental that state courts be left free and unfettered by us” when it comes to their own constitutions.
Like any litigator worth his salt, Katyal ignored the next sentence that began with one of the biggest three-letter words in the English language: but. And that exception was when it came to deciding the “validity under the federal constitution of state action.”
Katyal also failed to note that Bush v. Palm Beach revolved around a method for counting votes and not the state legislature’s power regarding federal elections. In the current case, lawyers for the Republican legislators are arguing that Article 2, §1, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution eliminates judicial oversight on how these maps are drawn.
The oral arguments in the case have been made, and the Supreme Court is expected to be handed down by June 2023.
Copyright 2022, WatchDogReport.org
