“A Supreme Court Case That Threatens the Mechanisms of Democracy: At stake in Moore v. Harper is the question of how elections should be run — and who should resolve the inevitable disputes when they arise.”
Andrew Marantz for The New Yorker.
Category Archives: Supreme Court
Kate Shaw on oral argument in Moore v. Harper
Over at Just Security, Kate Shaw has a piece entitled, “Oral Argument in Moore v. Harper and the Perils of Finding ‘Compromise’ on the Independent State Legislature Theory.” From it:
[A] majority may be willing to sign onto some version of… Continue reading
Foley, Muller discuss Moore v. Harper oral argument at Lawfare
The podcast is here.
“How conservatives played the long game on election law”
Turning Rehnquist’s concurring opinion in Bush v. Gore into a consensus majority standard
During oral argument in Moore v. Harper today, one could be forgiven to forget that Chief Justice William Rehnquist passed away nearly two decades ago and is not currently sitting on the court. He was invoked more than a dozen… Continue reading
Moore v. Harper oral argument recap roundup
What Difference Would It Make If the Supreme Court in the Moore v. Harper Case Embraced the Bush v. Gore Concurrence Rather Than a Full-Throated Independent State Legislature Theory?
In my earlier recap of today’s oral argument in Moore v. Harper (transcript here), I suggested that the middle ground position that the three Justices in the middle might embrace would be bad but not awful compared to the… Continue reading
(Rick Hasen) Live-Blogging the Supreme Court’s Oral Arguments in the Moore v. Harper (Independent State Legislature); Now UPDATED with Analysis and Reason to Think Court Will Reject Maximalist Version of ISLT
[This post has been updated.]
UPDATE:
After almost three hours of oral argument, a divided Supreme Court appeared searching for a middle ground to hold that in really egregious cases state courts can violate the federal constitution when they apply… Continue reading
Argument previews for Moore v. Harper
Jess Bravin in the Wall Street Journal.
Adam Liptak in the New York Times.
Nina Totenberg at NPR.
Robert Barnes in the Washington Post. (Which includes this graf: “‘Fringe’ is a word ubiquitous in the filings.… Continue reading
Some Moore v. Harper commentary and roundup
Ahead of oral argument in Moore v. Harper December 7, commentary and roundup is coming in from everywhere. A few pieces:
In the New York Times, Michael Wines has a piece, “Supreme Court to Hear Arguments on Far-Reaching Elections… Continue reading
“Republicans’ Supreme Court argument on redistricting could backfire”
Sam Wang oped for WaPo:
But if the Republicans win in the U.S. Supreme Court, the result on a national scale would almost certainly benefit Democrats. Why? Because outside North Carolina, only swing states and blue states have curbed… Continue reading
“The Supreme Court Case That’s All About Donald Trump: Even if it’s not explicitly about him at all.”
Quinta Jurecic on thie Moore v. Harper case in The Atlantic:
Over the past several months, both the litigants and outside parties—known as amici curiae, or “friends of the court”—have filed a mountain of briefs hashing out these issues. These… Continue reading
Ethan Herenstein: “Can State Legislatures Exercise Federal Legislative Power? A Flaw in the Defense of the Independent State Legislature Theory”
The following is a guest post from Ethan Herenstein of the Brennan Center:
In their reply brief defending the independent state legislature theory (ISLT), the petitioners in Moore v. Harper doubled down on the assertion that when state legislatures… Continue reading
“How the Supreme Court Plans to Undermine Future Elections”
Simon Lazarus for TNR.