SCOTUS Issues Ruling in Election Law Case
7,454 Views
Comments (7)
Share (19)
Print
SCOTUS Issues Ruling in Election Law Case
7,454 Views
Comments (7)
Share (19)
Print
I Prayed
have prayed
The Supreme Court has ruled against the North Carolina state legislature in an interesting yet difficult to comprehend case.
From The Daily Wire. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday against a Republican-drawn congressional map in North Carolina, rebuking “independent legislature theory.”
Join others crying out to the Lord day and night.
The theory proposed by the GOP lawyers believes that because Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution gives state legislatures the power to determine the “times, places and manner” of federal elections, state and federal courts have no business reviewing state decisions in redistricting.
“The Elections Clause does not insulate state legislatures from the ordinary exercise of state judicial review,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion.
The controversy was spurred when the North Carolina Supreme Court struck down the legislature’s congressional map, which favored Republican candidates. …
The decision gives power to federal courts to review state supreme court decisions regarding congressional maps’ compliance with state election laws. This means that federal courts could overrule state courts in deciding whether a map violates state law, not just federal law.
Roberts was joined by Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, and the three Democrat-appointed justices to form the 6-3 majority. The majority argued that the Supreme Court had jurisdiction over the case, state constitutions govern the legislature’s redistricting power, and state and federal courts can review the legality of state legislatures’ maps under state and federal laws.
Roberts argued that the Court had authority to hear the case because the only path for the GOP petitioners to be relieved is if SCOTUS overturned the state supreme court’s first decision on the matter, which was only partially overturned after Republicans took over the Tar Heel State’s high court. …
Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote a concurrence where he emphasized that federal courts should be limited in their jurisdiction to review state redistricting cases, pointing out the Court does not adopt a standard. He also argued that allowing federal courts this jurisdiction is not disrespect to state courts but a protection for state legislatures.
Justice Clarence Thomas dissented, arguing that the Court should not have even heard the case and that granting federal judges authority over controversies of state election law would “swell federal court dockets.” …
This case involved important legal issues that do not fit easily in sound bites. Pray for the justices to focus on legal interpretations and not political results, and thank God for those justices who regularly do just that.
(Excerpt from The Daily Wire. Photo Credit: Canva)
Comments (7)
Share (19)
Post A Prayer
Print
I Prayed
have prayed
Post A Prayer
Related Content
Daily Morning Prayer for America – December 23, 2024
I Prayed
Appeals Court Removes Prosecutor from Pres. Trump’s GA Case
I Prayed
Partner with Us
Intercessors for America is the trusted resource for millions of people across the United States committed to praying for our nation. If you have benefited from IFA's resources and community, please consider joining us as a monthly support partner. As a 501(c)3 organization, it's through your support that all this possible.
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it. Privacy Policy
Comments
Father, in the name of Jesus, you alone are all wise and understanding, intervene in tge best interest of our nation on these decisions, not our enemies. We thank you and praise you for hearing and answering our prayers.
Last year or actually in 2021-,when we were praying about the Dobb’s case- with the 50 days of prayer initiative- I read some other material online- about.. I believe it was-,Justices Thomas’s or possibly actually I don’t remember which one it was-but they were saying that they were kind of stuck in certain cases -,because so many cases and decisions have been funneling up to the Supreme Court- -that should have been decided at the state level-,because of the way things have changed..let’s just say-,to keep the conversation nice-,so it leaves me in a state of being.. I don’t know kind of confused about it- besides as we were adviced in this article.. that it’s very complicated- however, it doesn’t sound like as of what I read back then, that the justices on the court feel as though things are being handled in a way that is actually proper judgment-,in terms of the cases they are asked to handle- that they should never be asked to..
so I will just agree with the prayer at the top of this article..as I really have no idea how to pray about it.
Blessings to all
In southern California, redistricting is used as a manipulative device to control which public officials are installed in which districts- to control vote outcomes
This comment re .Texas Transactiona! Gold for which there is no place to reply.
This is extreme!y comolex issue which should offer in-depth details and discussion. Yet the blurb here onlyonly.a vague, tiny paragraph with .a lot of popular buzz words like “control spending”i pp and gold-standard. But easy to miss isthe key phrase, “digital currency” which in some form globalists are pushing to take real, hard- cuurency out of circulation, and so out of the hands of people and offers digital currency globalists want so they can track every piece of money, every transaction.
This is all the more misleading and so disappointing that this is offered with not only no clear details plus a letter asking people to just add their name and send it.in. Much appreciate IFA, but the way this respectfully vague, questionable and very possibly though no doubt unintentionally, misleading message.
Point here to ask if anyone here including.IGA know who behind this? Can IFA please look into this? Again, respectffully, this os a complex.issie calling for in-depth.examinination and analysis of all aspects. Would suggest that by asking IFA members to just sign and send this letter, this can easily be taken to imply IFA endorses this and also that itz is especially concerning and would urge IFA leaders to pull this I believe misleading and possibly dangerous “petition letter” until ot can be thoroughly investigated.
Thanks, and God bless
V.M
s
Father, give our SCOTUS much wisdom as they settle cases.
You need to also highlight the dissenting Justice’s opinion which shows this opens the door to courts controlling the rights given to the Legislatures regarding elections. This was a dangerous ruling that will create a ton of law fare for the next election. It is not the job of the courts but of the Legislatures to decide what the districts should be.
The Lord is in perfect control. Folks pray on both sides of many issues and especially issues such as this one, with far-reaching effects. Whose prayers will God answer? All of them!
In my humble opinion “State Rights” should trump federal abuse. Our constitution has been hijacked by SCOTUS misfits.