Fact Sheet
Moore v. Harper: Understanding the Impacts of the Decision
An explainer on the Moore v. Harper victory and what it means for our democracy and the impacts this decision has at the state level.
Litigation
Moore v. Harper
Common Cause took the fight for free and fair elections all the way to the Supreme Court and won.
Protecting Free and Fair Elections for All: Moore v. Harper
In June 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in our Moore v. Harper case, described by President Bush-appointed Judge J. Michael Luttig as “the most important case for American democracy.” The court handed voters a major victory, rejecting a dangerous idea that would have destroyed the basic structure of American democracy.
Common Cause’s legal fight helped beat back “the most serious legal threat our democracy has ever faced today.” Lawless lawmakers in North Carolina tried suggesting all state representatives should be able to make election rules without facing the checks and balances of the state courts or governors.
By dismissing the lawless lawmakers idea, the nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court protected voters from a reckless attempt to restrict and undermine the freedom to vote.
How did things get this far?
Moore v. Harper came from a fair maps victory we won at the North Carolina State Supreme Court, along with voting rights partners, including the Southern Coalition for Social Justice and Hogan Lovells.
What Happened: After North Carolina state legislators passed gerrymandered maps in 2021, we sued House Speaker Tim Moore. The case went all the way to the North Carolina State Supreme Court, where Moore’s maps were struck down for being partisan gerrymandered.
Rather than draw fair maps, Moore and North Carolina lawmakers took the cause to the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing they should have unlimited power over our voting maps and our elections.
That kind of absolute power for one branch of government would have shattered the checks and balances that serve as underpinnings of American democracy. It would have allowed state legislatures and the political party in power to weaponize elections against the voters.
What was at stake?
If the Lawless Lawmakers Theory had succeeded, it would have allowed state legislators to manipulate our elections for political—and partisan—gain. And, they would have the chance to do so without any checks from state courts or governors.
That would have legalized voter suppression tactics:
- Widespread purges of voters from voting rolls
- Dramatic cuts to popular early voting and vote-by-mail options
- Rigged voting maps that dilute people’s voting power
Your financial support helps us make an impact by holding power accountable and strengthening democracy.
Related Resources
Press
News Clip
CNN: Supreme Court urged by DOJ and other parties to sidestep independent state legislature dispute
But Common Cause, a group that opposes the GOP lawmakers, disagreed with the position taken by its own side and urged the justices to decide the case.
Neal Katyal, a lawyer for the group, stressed that the court should use the North Carolina case to decide the Independent State Legislature doctrine issue rather than wait until it arises again on an emergency basis “during the 2024 election cycle.”
Neal Katyal, a lawyer for the group, stressed that the court should use the North Carolina case to decide the Independent State Legislature doctrine issue rather than wait until it arises again on an emergency basis “during the 2024 election cycle.”
News Clip
MSNBC’s “Symone” (VIDEO): Common Cause’s Kathay Feng Discusses the Threat to Democracy Posed by the Supreme Court Case Moore v. Harper
“I think the reason Common Cause is fighting so hard to make sure everyday people understand what’s at stake in Moore v. Harper is that this is not just about who decides how lines are drawn for districts in North Carolina. This is fundamentally about our American democracy,” Common Cause's National Redistricting Director Kathay Feng tells Symone Sanders, host of MSNBC's Symone Show.