I have to say, I'm pleasantly surprised by this ruling. The way the court was leaning, I was fully expecting them to uphold the Independent State Legislature theory. And I'm extremely glad they rejected it, as it would have opened the door for MAGA-leaning state legislatures to unilaterally overturn their states' election results, which is utterly terrifying.
I think the supreme court very much rules with it's own relevance in mind.
Too much fuckery and the party in power will start supporting things like term limits and court packing.
There needs to be at least some fuckery, though, just to ensure the free yacht vacations and rent free homes for their moms don't disappear.
💀
The Coup started in the 40's with Prescott Bush and has been working it's way in eversince.
💀
Started probably earlier than that, at least according to MajGen Smedley Butler
I was actually trying to reference what your talking about and wildly botched the years...
Three judges voted for it. The usual anti democracy suspects.
If in the last few months, SCOTUS wasn't being delegitimized through solid investigative journalism by some members of the press that the right-wing justices would have been ruling in the opposite.
There's a theory going around that the main thing SCOTUS has been doing for a couple decades is increasing the power of courts over the other branches of government, and this decision is exactly in keeping with that.
A theory that could hold water.
All government branches try to upset the delicate balance as far as they can, and this might be part of it…but they did slap down quite a stinker here.
Congress has been shirking it's power in favor of groveling before the executive branch for several generations, excluding a brief post-watergate reassertion of power.
I only disagree on the time length, because this has been happening since Marbury v Madison
Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito dissented
Well, no surprise there, even though their reason was that the decision is moot.
Correct if I'm wrong, I'm just starting to read these supreme court decisions straight from the court, but is the dissent that basically the case was about gerrymandering not being a "judiciable" thing and it was a political one? That we should only look at the cases and not at the ppl it would affect?
No, it was because NC updated their constitution to eliminate political gerrymandering, so the specific issue is moot. Here's the salient part from the article (talking about what Roberts wrote):
"Although partisan gerrymandering claims are no longer viable under the North Carolina Constitution, the North Carolina Supreme Court has done nothing to alter the effect of the judgment in Harper I enjoining the use of the 2021 maps. As a result, the legislative defendants' path to complete relief runs through this Court," he wrote. Harper I is the North Carolina Supreme Court's February 2022 decision.
Oh, i see. Thanks for the reply.
This was huge and the independent legislature theory was a big part of the efforts to overturn the 2020.
This is a huge deal.
Agreed, this at least means our democracy is still safe to continue. Though the 3 assholes should get impeached for thinking this is a good idea.
Republicans will have to find a different way to rig their elections.
They'll always find a way to rig their elections as they can't stand losing.
Well I will celebrate a positive outcome!
I am still skeptical of the institution, wonder if they are throwing us some softballs in preparation of another really bad decision.
They seem to be doing the most shady stuff via the shadow docket.
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News