Get 40% Off
⚠ Earnings Alert! Which stocks are poised to surge?
See the stocks on our ProPicks radar. These strategies gained 19.7% year-to-date.
Unlock full list

North Carolina's top court hears redistricting case with national implications

Published 03/14/2023, 06:04 AM
Updated 03/14/2023, 09:35 PM
© Reuters

By Joseph Ax

(Reuters) -North Carolina Republicans on Tuesday urged the state's high court to reverse course and permit lawmakers to draw politically advantageous legislative districts, an outcome that would boost the party's chances of holding onto its tenuous majority in the U.S. House of Representatives next year.

The hearing in Raleigh took place after the state Supreme Court's conservative justices agreed to reconsider a 2022 ruling that found partisan redistricting, or gerrymandering, was unlawful under the state constitution.

That ruling, issued by what was then a Democratic-majority court, invalidated a Republican-drawn map that would likely have secured 11 of the state's 14 congressional seats for Republicans. Instead, Democrats and Republicans split the seats evenly in November's elections under a court-approved map.

In the same elections, Republicans flipped two Democratic seats on the court, installing a 5-2 conservative majority that weeks later made the extremely unusual decision to rehear the redistricting case. Legal experts have said the move suggests the court intends to throw out the earlier ruling.

Tuesday's hearing offered little evidence to the contrary. Several conservative justices appeared sympathetic to the Republicans' arguments, while the court's two Democrats expressed skepticism.

Phillip Strach, a lawyer for Republican lawmakers, said the power to oversee redistricting resides in the legislature, not the courts.

"Just to be clear, you're saying ... that the legislature has free rein to enact legislative districts that give extreme advantage to one political party," said Justice Anita Earls, a Democrat.

"This court does not have the power to address that issue," Strach replied.

Lali Madduri, a lawyer for the voting rights groups who challenged the original maps, said allowing extreme partisan redistricting would essentially disenfranchise supporters of the opposing party.

"The ultimate standard here is whether the voters have substantially equal voting power," she said.

While a reversal would aid Republicans' quest to maintain their U.S. House majority, it could doom a separate Republican-backed effort to convince the U.S. Supreme Court to grant state legislatures sweeping new powers over federal elections.

North Carolina Republicans also appealed last year's redistricting decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, where they advanced a contentious legal theory, the independent state legislature doctrine, that has gained traction in conservative legal circles.

The theory holds that it is unconstitutional for state courts to review lawmakers' actions regarding federal elections and would give legislators unfettered authority over voting rules and redistricting.

Democrats have warned that doing so would invite new restrictions that would threaten fair elections, while Republicans say it would corral activist state courts that are undermining legislative power.

© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein speaks to the media outside of the United States Supreme Court following oral arguments in Moore v. Harper, a Republican-backed appeal to curb judicial oversight of elections, in Washington, U.S., December 7, 2022. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein

The Supreme Court's conservative justices appeared to agree during oral arguments in December. But after the North Carolina court's decision to rehear the case, the U.S. Supreme Court asked the various parties in the case to weigh in on whether the court still has jurisdiction over the matter.

If the justices decide they no longer have jurisdiction, they could dismiss the case without issuing a ruling.

Latest comments

elections have consequences
What a charade.
the courts are legislating from the bench again!
Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.