WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court should reject the dangerous and fringe independent state legislature theory (ISLT) presented in Moore contra Harper regardless of the highly unusual decision by the North Carolina Supreme Court to rehear the remedial decision in Harper contra Hall, according to a new plaintiff’s letter responding to the high court.

“This Court retains jurisdiction over this case regardless of the outcome of the North Carolina Supreme Court’s rehearing proceedings in Harper II,” the letter states. “Petitioners ask this Court to decide whether state courts can play any role in adjudicating congressional redistricting maps. No matter how the North Carolina Supreme Court rules on rehearing of Harper II, that issue will remain live before this Court.”

Lea la carta informativa complementaria completa aquí.

The U.S. Supreme Court requested supplemental briefing in Moore on March 2, 2023, asking parties what the effect was on its jurisdiction following the North Carolina Supreme Court’s rehearing of the December 16, 2022, decision in Harper contra Hall. That decision, Harper II, considered whether the remedial maps used in the 2022 election were still unconstitutional partisan gerrymanders.

The North Carolina Supreme Court’s earlier February 2022 opinion, Harper yo, struck down the original 2021 state legislative and congressional maps enacted by the North Carolina legislature as unconstitutional gerrymanders, and is the decision that was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in Moore.

Oral arguments in Moore took place on December 7, 2022. At that time, the N.C. Supreme Court had already rejected gamesmanship in mapmaking in Harper II by ruling the partisan gerrymandering disproportionately and unconstitutionally came at the expense of minority voters in the state. Once the North Carolina court changed partisan composition in early 2023 however, it granted a rehearing of the later remedial decision issued in December at Republican legislators’ request. The time for rehearing Harper yo is long past, but legislators have asked the North Carolina Supreme Court to overrule that decision as well.

Some court watchers have questioned whether the move in North Carolina would moot the Moore case. The supplemental brief filed today by Neal Kumar Katyal, socio de Hogan Lovells and co-counsel with Southern Coalition for Social Justice (SCSJ) representing Plaintiff Common Cause, set forth why the state proceedings do not change the Supreme Court’s ability to issue a decision in Moore:

“This Court should not wait until this question comes before it on an emergency basis in the lead up to the 2024 election cycle,” wrote Katyal, who also argued the case before the U.S. Supreme Court Justices in December 2022. “The question presented is fully briefed, thoroughly argued, and ripe for decision. This Court is the only forum that can definitively resolve that question and provide guidance to state legislatures and state courts across the country.”

Los defensores del derecho al voto han pedido De Moore El argumento de la ISLT es una grave amenaza para la democracia. Los legisladores que suscriben esta teoría pervierten la cláusula electoral de la Constitución de los Estados Unidos para afirmar que sólo las legislaturas estatales tienen el poder de determinar cómo deben trazarse los mapas de los distritos federales y, además, que los tribunales estatales no pueden intervenir en ese proceso ni pueden aplicarse las constituciones estatales si son contrarias a la voluntad de un grupo de legisladores que buscan afianzar su poder.

“We knew from the start this brazen power grab was wrong and flew in the faces of the U.S and North Carolina Constitutions,” said Bob Phillips, Common Cause North Carolina’s Executive Director. “Nothing has changed on that front. We need the U.S. Supreme Court to toss this nonsensical ‘independent state legislature theory’ into the dustbin where it belongs — and there is no better time than now when we aren’t on the eve of a major election.”

Oral arguments in Moore lasted three and a half hours, a lengthy period of time in which the U.S. Supreme Court Justices examined the flimsy legal underpinnings of the dangerous ISLT that would erode people’s voting rights.

“ISLT was wrong when this matter was briefed and argued before the Supreme Court in 2022, and it remains wrong in 2023,” said Hilary Harris Klein, asesora principal de derechos de voto en SCSJ. “Nothing that has happened in the state proceedings has changed this fact, and the arguments and briefing show definitively that voters deserve an unambiguous rejection of this dangerous theory by our country’s highest court.”

Una decisión en Moore is expected early this summer.

“Checks and balances were embedded throughout our Constitution to prevent any one person, group or political party from unjustly seizing power that rightly belongs to the people,” said Kathay Feng, Common Cause’s Vice-President for Programs. “The U.S. Supreme Court, when they release their decision in a few months, must reject this reckless attempt to hand state lawmakers unchecked power to manipulate our elections.”

Contactos de prensa:
Sarah Ovaska | sovaska@commoncause.org | 919-606-6112
Bryan Warner | bwarner@commoncause.org | 919-836-0027
Melissa Boughton | melissa@scsj.org | 830-481-6901

Causa común es una organización de base no partidista dedicada a defender los valores fundamentales de la democracia estadounidense. Trabajamos para crear un gobierno abierto, honesto y responsable que sirva al interés público; promover la igualdad de derechos, oportunidades y representación para todos; y empoderar a todas las personas para que hagan oír su voz en el proceso político.

La Coalición Sureña para la Justicia Social, fundada en 2007, colabora con comunidades de color y comunidades económicamente desfavorecidas del Sur para defender y promover sus derechos políticos, sociales y económicos mediante la combinación de defensa legal, investigación, organización y comunicaciones. Obtenga más información en coaliciónsur.org y sigue nuestro trabajo en Gorjeo, Facebook, y Instagram.