Moore v Harper Could End Our Democracy

[gab13by13]

Gorsuch, Alito, Thomas, and Kavanaugh signed on for the SC to hear this case.

This case is about adopting the "independent state legislature doctrine." State legislatures have absolute authority to run their elections.

This case came about because NC legislators gerrymandered 10 districts to favor Republicans and 4 districts to favor Democrats, even though the parties in the state are pretty evenly split. The NC Supreme Court rejected the map because it said the map violated the state's Constitution. Well this fascist Supreme Court is taking a look at this case, it is on the docket.

What this means is that state legislators will have authority over its state SC, over the state Constitution, over election officials, and possibly over the will of the people in selecting electors to the Electoral college.

Gorsuch, Alito, and Thomas are going to vote for this and most likely so will Barrett. Saving our democracy may come down to how Kavanaugh and Roberts vote.

I live in Pa. and my legislators want this. The state legislators will have absolute authority over how elections are run and decided.

Fascism is fast approaching. Watch for this SC case - Moore v Harper.

https://www.lwv.org/blog/state-legislature-seeks-unchecked-power-over-elections-moore-v-harper

[lark]

1. Christofascists are in charge and asserting themselves to utterly destroy democracy.

We have got to stop this fascist over=reach by changing the court dramatically. Otherwise America is totally gone within 10 years and that's giving them the benefit of the doubt. America will end in fact after the 2024 election if these RW asses at SCOTUS have their way - and so far it looks like Dems can't/won't stop them. We have to win 2022 big enough to overturn the filibuster and change the court or we are totally dead.

[themaguffin]

25. No, not "Christo" anything. Just fascists. There's zero Christ in their beliefs. None.

[lark]

38. They proclaim "Christ, christ" but they do nothing to advance the teachings of Jesus.

They use religion as a prop and as a weapon to keep women in their place and promote the aristocracy of $$$$$ and hate

[Native]

2. Another interesting thread on this was posted yesterday.

Re letter sent to SCOTUS from the group representing all 50 states' Supreme Court Chief Justices.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1069&pid=11102

And this article about it:
https://www.reuters.com/legal/top-state-court-judges-defend-their-election-oversight-us-supreme-court-2022-09-07/

[gab13by13]

5. Yes, thank you for posting this.

What these state SC justices did is unprecedented. I hope this can sway Kavanaugh and Roberts. I feel good about Roberts because he has lost control of the court, Alito is the acting Chief justice.

[Heather MC]

3. If they pass this the great American experiment is over

😥 It will certainly feel that way won't it

[ancianita]

4. If SCOTUS rules that there's no absolute right to vote, it would allow states to nullify votes from

now on. Perhaps popular vote nullification is outside the scope of Moore v Harper, but that would still be what the SCOTUS pro "independent state legislature doctrine" would allow statehouses to actually claim.

Keeping the demos out of democracy creates the space for patriarchal christo-fascist control.

[gab13by13]

6. The legal term is it would give state legislators plenary power,

same thing as absolute IMO.

[ancianita]

16. Right. Which I detailed. And if Kavanaugh and Robert don't vote this down, next session, (Oct 1 2022

Last edited Thu Sep 8, 2022, 10:56 AM - Edit history (2)

until June or July 2023) women and girls can kiss not just their bodily autonomy goodbye, but their economic independence as well.

Women and all non-whites can register to vote like crazy right now and go down fighting, but we all need to understand that in spite of record turnout, this case could result in a Republican led Congress.

I'm usually optimistic about the GOTV in this midterm. But I don't think that enough voters across the country know to change the party makeup of their statehouses to Democratic, in spite of current gerrymanders and vote suppression efforts.

In which case the next SCOTUS term could mean the end of the popular majority vote for all elections...

Which means
-- there will be no judiciary reform, therefore,
-- no expanded SCOTUS to overturn Citizens United and Dobbs, and
-- there will be no Democratic majority to codify Roe v Wade.
-- there will be no social security or medicare/medicaid.

There will be no US military coming to The People's aid, either.

Again. Keeping the demos out of democracy creates the space for patriarchal christo-fascist under corporate control.

[Farmer-Rick]

29. But the US Constitution still says:

AMENDMENT XV
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude--

Section 2.
The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

AMENDMENT XIX
Passed by Congress June 4, 1919. Ratified August 18, 1920.

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

[ancianita]

31. Then Congress better USE its "power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."

and wake up to the possible/probable SCOTUS ruling that does for voting what it did for abortion.

Do you have any reason to think that in reality Congress will do this before the Moore v Harper ruling? I don't. Just because it can doesn't mean it will. As we saw with Roe.

[Farmer-Rick]

49. I'm not saying you're wrong

I just wonder how pretzel like the court will end up.

If, like the Supremely Religious Court wants, America gets a dictator or king, the court's power will vanish. They will be silly little people kowtowing to a cruel master.

Some dictators get rid of the courts and just get the police or political arm keep citizens in line. Some dictators keep the court system but turn them into their little death panels.

Russia comes to mind. The courts don't interpret law, just carry out death sentences, jail political prisoners, collect excessive fines, do as they are told. And the very weird thing is that seems preferential to the Supremes. And they claim that's what it says in the Constitution.

[ancianita]

53. Oh, I know. We just need for our congress to act. I don't think it will.

There will be plenty of blame to go around when democracy dies, and of course, corporate right wing media will lay democracy's death at the feet of the Democratic Party.

Then this place will truly, literally become a Democratic Underground.

[orthoclad]

55. Politicians need to use the power

that we hired them to execise.

[ancianita]

58. "Need." The key word. It's arguable that they need to use it.

The 117th needed to codify Roe when they saw the Trump makeup of SCOTUS, and they didn't.

I'd wager they don't need to prevent precedent overturns as much as to get paid and re-elected. Sounds cynical, but so far they've failed to exercise vote protections or fight against the 'independent state legislature theory.'

Here's Democracy Docket's discussion of how this "debate" might turn out re SCOTUS.

https://www.democracydocket.com/opinion/the-partisan-implications-of-the-isl-theory/

[orthoclad]

61. You're right.

It would be better phrased as "we need to pressure them to use the power".
Good link. I'll study it.

[Ferrets are Cool]

7. As scary as the Roe decision was, this one is even worse.

IMO

[Samrob]

8. Pretty soon, voting by the people won't even have to happen.

The Constitution has already been shredded since Trump took office. What 's next? Just handing all of government to the GOP?

[FelineOverlord]

9. Since the majority of Americans will NEVER accept this

And we'd have already lost everything, we'd have to make some choices on fighting back.


Full Belarus:

Full South Korea:

or Full French Resistance:

[Shipwack]

52. I wish I shared your optimism.

About 60% of eligible Americans vote during presidential elections. I have little doubt that the Republicans in this group (40%?) would care if voting stopped mattering, as long as they had the power.

About 40% vote in the midterms.

Even fewer vote in the “off” years.

Unless it impeded the Super Bowl or American Idol, most Americans would just shrug their shoulders and go on with their lives if voting ceased to matter...

[FBaggins]

10. Except that they don't have to use the "independent state legislature doctrine"

They could rule that state courts have the power to interpret the state constitution (and thus overrule an action by the state legislature) but that they do not then have the power to replace the plan with one of their own.

IOW that neither state legislatures nor courts should have unchecked power.

[gab13by13]

18. The SC would have to vote no to the case,

otherwise state legislators will have power over the state SC and over the state Constitution.

[FBaggins]

21. Why?

They could simply send the case back down to the state SC and tell them that they can overrule a redistricting plan, but they can't replace it with one of their own for a full decade.

[gab13by13]

26. You just made it more confusing.

The state's SC decision is what is being challenged. The legislators are the people who draw the map, the SC found that it violated their Constitution, the case is asking that the legislators be given the power to draw their own map without the court's interference. What is there to send back? Either the NC SC has the authority or it doesn't.

[Stuckinthebush]

11. Frightening

We really need to expand the SC in order to save the country from authoritarian rule.

[judesedit]

12. And get rid of the electoral college altogether. 1 person, 1 vote that should count

[pazzyanne]

15. Agree absolutely!!! nt

[ancianita]

62. That will not happen if SCOTUS rules yes on Moore v Harper. See post #16

[Stuckinthebush]

67. Help me think through this

If the outcome of Moore v. Harper gives state legislatures power to overturn the will of the people, then you are saying that this 2022 midterm election could be the first time that would happen. Therefore, even if the popular vote gives the Dems 52 to 56 senators the GOP legislatures can override that and install the GOP federal senate candidate regardless of popular vote. So, in 2023 we'd have a GOP senate so no possibility of adding to the SC.

Am I reading that right?

But, the senate now with 50 votes (plus 1 with Harris) could expand the court before the 2023 installation of senators.

Of course that would require all 50 votes and that isn't a certainty.

I'm seeing the issue now.

Oof

[ancianita]

69. Okay, then.

There's more to consider besides vote numbers. It's time.

And it's the sell to congress at large. Maybe Kinzinger, Cheney and other Repubs on the way out would vote for it. That would help save us from what the current precedent-overturning court might do.

The House and Senate Democrats of the current 117th, to the best of my knowledge, only have one bill on judicial reform introduced back last year. If they've begun their judicial reform investigation in a way that could sell the benefits to anyone but themselves, I haven't read or heard about it. The Brennan Center for Justice has ideas about what should be done.

They still haven't begun the process of building the proposal, perhaps changing it to establish 13 justices instead of the 12 of the original bill. They might have submitted it to relevant committees for further hearings, by now, but the dot gov site doesn't show that. Hearings completed, committees vote it out to the floor of either house; then the bill gets read in full, debated, along with making amendments, and then it's goes for a full vote of both the House and Senate.

How long have other bills taken, on average? I could only guess, but if such a bill were passed into law by Oct 1, when the SCOTUS sits for the next session (which lasts 'til June or July, 2023), how would it change anything in the duration. I've no idea since no SCOTUS has been changed since the 1800's.

If Pelosi and Schumer could fast-track it and the nominating and confirmation process, it would be the fastest reform of any kind in U.S. history.

[pazzyanne]

13. ...

[JohnnyRingo]

14. It will only be bad if the state legislators abuse the system.

...yeah.. It's an end to the election process and there will no longer be any reason to vote.
Figures those four SC justices would want to hear the case.

[Mad_Machine76]

40. And that's counting on a LOT

As we've seen with Trump and McConnell, et. al, they will stretch if not break norms to get the result they want and so will Republican-led state legislatures. They are doing it as we speak. Of course, Republicans might want to think about what would happen once the shoe is on the other foot. ISL doctrine will quickly become as popular as early voting to them.

[barbtries]

17. I don't know if they've been working toward this always,

or since Reagan, or whatever, but I see this as Karl Rove's endgame. permanent minority rule by republicans. white male supremacy over any and all others.

since 2010 the republicans in NC have more than rivaled the republicans in DC for pure fuckery. I live here in a state of dread, rage, and frustration.

scares the crap out of me and makes me want to move to a democratic country. i know i won't, too. my children, my grandchildren, they're not coming with me. i can't leave them. plus i'm old. this shit makes me more tired by the day.

it never ends. i hate republicans: they're zombies who never sleep and as George Carlin said so plainly, "They don't care about you."

[gab13by13]

22. I hear ya, I have thought the same as you, I'm 75, staying put.

I live in Pa. where Doug Mastriano, who was sent by God, to rid the world of evil Democrats is running for governor. If he wins, my vote for president won't count in 2024.

The Republican party realizes that our country isn't going to be majority white, so they need to find a way to hold on to minority rule.

Reagan really did convince the working class to vote against their own best interests, anything that helps the average American is labeled Socialism.

All I can say is that Democrats need to win more Senate seats in November and then immediately add 4 SC justices.

[GenXer47]

30. we can't move anyway

Who would take us?

[barbtries]

33. Panama, maybe. Spain? I don't know, someone.

but it's moot.

I just never believed growing up that it would come to this in the USA. It took until gw for me to actually begin to apprehend just how truly bad republicans are. then much to my amazement it got worse, and worse.

[Evolve Dammit]

59. I hear you Barb. Never imagined we could become just another corrupted country. Laws are for suckers

apparently, or make new ones to steal away what you want. I have two teens and I'm really worried about their future. Well, all of our futures actually.
I heard Portugal is pretty nice...

[barbtries]

65. i feel like Portugal would be heavenly.

of course I don't speak the language but there's always google translate...

just to live in a place where the common good is still agreed upon as a virtue to be pursued. sigh.

[Evolve Dammit]

71. I'm ready, but family first and it's not easy to uproot. Time will tell!

[Joinfortmill]

34. Amen

[kacekwl]

19. I guess the United States means nothing

anymore. There are certain things that should be universal in the United States like voting rights, election procedures etc. Things that affect the country as a whole. If this is the way now we might as well get rid of the electoral college if my state doesn't want it. If any state can do as they please United means nothing.

[rubbersole]

20. State legislators will abuse the system.

Just look how quickly they passed laws restricting voting...boilerplate laws written by the Heritage Foundation and ALEC. The dark money behind this and the Federalist Society, if exposed, would be as alarming as document boy's transgressions.

[bullimiami]

23. If they keep pushing they will dissolve the union.

I cant imagine blue states just going along with rule by an installed minority party.

[barbtries]

35. agreed.

they may win the downfall of democracy but they'll never have a moment's peace. power to the people.

[DFW]

24. Republicans can read polls, too

They know in what low esteem many Americans hold them, and how they would fare if elections were truly free.

Ergo, they will do everything they can to ensure that elections are NOT free, but permanently skewed artificially in their favor. It is not a difficult concept to grasp, just a very frightening one.

[gab13by13]

27. Now that is exactly it, well said.

[orthoclad]

42. Why did the Right politicize the vax?

That puzzled me. Why kill off your voters?
I suspect that they have confidence that the popular vote has been weakened to the point where it is ineffective. Stuff like Moore v. Harper, gerrymanders, poll-tax-voter-suppression laws.

[DFW]

68. I suspect it was purely a gut reaction

If a Democrat said it was good, better not waste a second saying it is bad. It is who they are these days.

Killing off their supporters was never a worry with them. if it were, they would have supported the ACA. They must figure that if one Foxsucker dies, there will always be a new one to take its place (Hail Hydra, Immortal Hydra, we shall never be destroyed).

[In It to Win It]

28. This case scares the absolute fuck out of me

I was visibly shaken by the insanity of what could happen since they announced it.

[gab13by13]

41. Tell me about it,

I live in Pa. where Republicans got to draw voting districts for the past 20 years. My Rep. is a worthless piece of shit, Glenn Thompson, whose claim to fame is that he drinks oil and breathes methane but beating him is tough.

This is the same for all of the other states that are controlled by Republicans, they make sure that they keep the majority. Giving them more power is catastrophic.

[In It to Win It]

54. Sounds like

we have the same problem. I'm in Florida.

The Republicans in my state are insane. The thing that really bugs me about is that there seems to be no check on their bullshit. Obviously there's federal law. Also, the voters passed an amendment to the state constitution. Federal law hasn't stopped them from doing insane shit; the state constitution seems to be an afterthought to these people; the state appellate courts and state supreme court seems to be of no use.

The Florida Legislature seems to not need SCOTUS. They do whatever they want anyway.

[New Breed Leader]

57. Same.

I haven't been able to think straight since they announced it a couple months ago.

The fact that the conservative justices on the scotus even agreed to hear it means we're in big trouble.

[Joinfortmill]

32. Pray. Vote.

[Farmer-Rick]

36. They want a dictatorship or king.

They are trying to rid the United States of democracy all together.

The Supremely Religious Court has lost its pea sized mind. They hate democracy. Do they think a dictator would listen to anything they want? A dictator doesn't really need a judiciary. The courts would be useless with a king or dictator.

The filthy rich want a dictatorship because it is easier to control. Democracies have a habit of preventing the filthy rich from taking everything.

Capitalism created these filthy rich oligarchs.

[orthoclad]

44. Jimmy Carter said the US is an oligarchy

[orthoclad]

37. Keep banging this gong!

Jan6 failed, but the slow coup of this rogue Court is an ongoing threat. The damage they have already done is nothing compared to what they can do next.

If Trump is convicted, who will hear his final appeal? He has a get out of jail free card.

Will Moore v. Harper be allowed to influence the midterms? If Independent State Legislature theory were enthroned in Court law in 2020, what would have happened?

The people we hired to administer this country must take action NOW to protect us from these rogues. FDR did it. There are ways to limit the overreach of the Court. We must not be timid. They aren't timid. After all, they have God on their side.

Start investigating the Thomases.

Look into perjury charges against Kav. Dredge up the phony FBI investigation.

I'm not a politician, I don't have expertise in how to maneuver the levers of power. The people who have been in DC for decades have this knowledge. Ask them what they csn do.

Everyone on this board will be voting. Our hired politicians need to ACT to motivate the US people to vote, the large numbers of independent people who need to see action, not ads, to give them the impetus to vote.

Fix the Court.

[lostinhere]

39. What the US Constitution Say Regarding Elections and State Legislatures

Article 1, Section 4 states (in part) [emphasis is mine]

Section 4
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

Source used throughout: https://www.senate.gov/civics/constitution_item/constitution.htm

Article 2, Section 1 states (in part)

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

The 12th Amendment deals with Electors but not how they are chosen.

The 15th, 18th, 24th, & 26th Amendments deals with voter rights, but not the voting process or procedure.

The 17th Amendment deals with the Senators, but not voting process or procedure.




So (once again) regardless of the State or the Supreme Court, Congress (both houses) has the final say.

Regarding the Senate Filibuster: My only comment is that the party in power changes: so what one party wroth, the other can change.

[gab13by13]

46. Yes, good catch,

Congress is given an opening.

[Farmer-Rick]

60. The states are still restricted in

Preventing people of color and women from voting according to the 15th and 19th amendments.

But since the whole goal is to destroy democracy, what would violating 2 Constitutional amendment bother them anyway?

UNLESS of course you took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic AND that includes the 15th and 19th amendments. Do people actually read what they sign up for?

[lostinhere]

66. Hmmm

Actually, destroying our federal representative democratic form of government would violate both Constitutional Articles and all of the amendments referenced in the previous message.

The point I was making was the source of any solution, for better or worse, the US Congress. The court case that the OP was discussing will reach the US Supreme Court because question applies directly to the Constitution, i.e. State Legislatures decide voting processes and procedures unless Congress passes an applicable law. In our system of governance, the courts interpret the law. So, the State Legislature decides voting processes and procedures and Federal Courts interprets how the Constitution, Amendments and laws apply to the specific case. Regardless of what the State Legislatures want or the Courts decide, Congress has the final say.

Regarding your question about the Oath of Office, I was under the military version for over 30 years. I believe that the vast majority of people who take the oath, military or civilian, have read it and most understand it. However, how many people do each of us personally know keep most (much less all) of their promises?

We all make promises every day that we mean at the time, but depending on the personal importance of the promise, we don't keep. Think of a promise to a child about a bedtime story. Its very important to the child, but less important to most adults.

A better question may be, does the person taking the oath feel bound by the oath under all circumstances? Or, only in some situations?

If that question doesn't give you a head ache, or if you want to dive further down the rabbit hole, here's a related one to noodle on...

The US military takes an oath that includes the phrase, 'all enemies, foreign and domestic'. Who defines 'enemy'?
The schoolhouse answer is: The people of the United States through their elected representatives (Declaration of War). Since the end of World War II, its been: The people of the United States through their elected President as Commander in Chief.

What is the answer???

[Zeitghost]

70. Congress has a say in Congressional elections

But as Article 2, which you quoted above, notes, State Legislatures have complete control of selecting electors to the EC. A public election for President is not mandated in any way.

[lindysalsagal]

43. Lincoln is turning over in his grave.

So many died to preserve the union, and this handful of cretins could undo it all with one vote.

Seriously, I've never been so scared.

[orthoclad]

48. The Covfeferacy won the peace

The War didn't end, Reconstruction ended.
So now we have States Rights.

[MontanaMama]

45. The fact that SCOTUS even agreed to hear the case

tells us all we need to know. We know who they are. The time to be in the streets is NOW. After they break our democracy, it is too late.

[Brainfodder]

47. No thanks, not subscribing to 1 thing wrecking havoc.

Besides, option: leave in my back pocket.

Are you staying if under the remote chance, the USA going total fascist?

Not buying into that extreme, at least not yet.

[Justice matters.]

50. The Fascist Society should be put on the list of terrorist organizations. eom

[ancianita]

51. Here's a SCOTUS case docket page that lists the case's process.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21-1271.html

Looks like 20+ amicus briefs filed so far -- from ALEC, to the RNC to the States of Arkansas, Arizona, Alabama, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah -- a heavily right wing flotilla of amicus briefs.

It's going to be a huge case of plaintiffs and respondents across the country.

Thank you so much for this hugely important OP.

[TeamProg]

56. Then it's time to add four more LIBERAL Justices. n/t

[Evolve Dammit]

63. thanks for this post. good info

[Ligyron]

64. The majority of Americans have no idea this is even occurring.

They’re just going to wake up one morning and wonder what happened when the next election is over and some rw nutjob is installed instead of the guy who actually won.

Then it will be, “Hey, wait a minute … they can’t do that! Err, can they?”

Huh, wonder how that happened…

Bless their hearts.