ICYMI: NRF Supports Respondents in Consequential SCOTUS Case Moore v. Harper
Contact
Jena Doyle
doyle@redistrictingfoundation.org
ICYMI: NRF Supports Respondents in Consequential SCOTUS Case Moore v. Harper
Washington, D.C. — On Wednesday, December 7, the Supreme Court of the United States will hear oral argument in Moore v. Harper, an appeal filed by North Carolina Republicans that seeks to give state legislatures near-total control over federal election laws, including but not limited to congressional redistricting. The National Redistricting Foundation (NRF), the 501(c)(3) affiliate of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, is supporting the Harper respondents in this case.
Specifically, Moore v. Harper is an appeal of Harper v. Hall, a landmark state court case initiated by the NRF in which the North Carolina Supreme Court determined that the congressional map enacted by Republicans in the state legislature was an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. As a result of that ruling, a state court ultimately adopted a fair congressional map. The final map approved by the court allowed an equal number of Democrats and Republicans to be elected to the U.S House of Representatives, accurately reflecting the competitive nature of North Carolina.
On Sunday, Attorney General Eric Holder joined Margaret Brennan on CBS Face the Nation to discuss the stakes of Moore v. Harper. In case you missed it, here are some key quotes from the interview:
“It [the independent state legislature theory] is something that if the Supreme Court goes along with it, would really upend our system of checks and balances. And it's for that reason that I am extremely concerned.”
“It is a fringe theory, this is something that if the Court I think does the right thing, you should have a nine to zero opinion by the court that rejects this notion of this independent state legislature doctrine that has been rejected by conservative scholars, by practicing Republican lawyers, by former Republican judges, and by this conference of state supreme court justices, as well. This is a very, very dangerous theory. It would put our system of checks and balances at risk.”
In September, Attorney General Holder also spoke with reporters to discuss Moore v. Harper as well as Merrill v. Milligan, another redistricting case before the Court where NRF is supporting the Merrill petitioners. In case you missed it, here are some key quotes from Attorney General Holder during that event:
“In Moore v. Harper, a bedrock principle of our democracy is being challenged: our system of checks and balances. North Carolina Republicans are attempting to nullify state constitutional provisions that protect voters so that they can hand near total control over federal elections to politicians in state legislatures.”
…
“If the Court sides with the North Carolina Republicans, they would be granting state legislatures more power to infringe on voting rights, to gerrymander -- all without the check of a state court.”
…
“Let me be clear: These are cases we should win. They present straightforward questions for the Court to address – questions that have actually already been answered by existing precedent. But how the Court rules in these cases will tell us all we need to know about whether this Court values precedent, institutionalism and frankly the protection of our democracy.”
In case you missed it, here is a sample of our coverage on Moore v. Harper in recent months:
CBS: VIDEO - Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan: Eric Holder ‘extremely concerned about Supreme Court Elections Case
AP: Supreme Court weighs ‘most important case’ on democracy
Excerpt:
“The bottom line is the impact of this fringe theory would be terrible,” said former Attorney General Eric Holder, chairman of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee. “It could unleash a wave of gerrymandering from both parties.”
POLITICO: Supreme Court to Hear 2 Cases with Major Implications with 2024
Excerpt:
“You cannot look at these cases objectively, without acknowledging the fact that taken together, they could determine whether or not the United States remains as the democracy that we have come to love,” former Attorney General Eric Holder, who leads the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, told reporters. “I think, unfortunately, we take for granted a democracy that fulfills the promise of one person, one vote.”
The Charlotte News and Observer: NC Elections Case Goes to the Supreme Court. How we got Here, and What’s Next.
Excerpts:
North Carolina’s upcoming case at the U.S. Supreme Court has the potential to upend elections nationwide, in time for the 2024 presidential race.
…
This case is technically an appeal of a gerrymandering ruling, which found state lawmakers violated the constitution with new Congressional maps drawn after the 2020 Census. However, it’s far from just that.
…
Critics say it has the potential to end democracy as we know it.
Eric Holder, a Democrat and former U.S. attorney general under Barack Obama, said it “should keep every American up at night.” Michael Luttig, a Republican and retired federal judge who George W. Bush considered nominating to the Supreme Court, recently called it “the single-most important case on American democracy” of the last 250 years.
The Atlantic: Moore v. Harper Could Derail America’s Democracy
Excerpt:
Former Attorney General Eric Holder warned that, depending on how the Court rules, Moore could pose “an existential threat to our democracy.”
###
