Supreme Court Seeks More Briefing in Major Election-Law Case (1)

The US Supreme Court requested a new round of briefing in a closely watched election-law case, suggesting the justices have questions about their power to rule after a lower court said it would reconsider one aspect of the clash.

The case, which the court heard in December, could transform federal elections by giving state lawmakers more power to set the rules and stripping state judges and other officials of longstanding roles. The outcome could affect congressional districts, voter eligibility and mail-in ballot requirements.

The fight centers on a Republican-drawn congressional map that the North Carolina Supreme Court said was so partisan it violated the state constitution. State courts later imposed their own map for the 2022 election.

But when Republicans seized control of the state high court after last year’s vote, the panel decided to revisit the decision to impose a new map.

In their one-paragraph order Thursday, the justices pointed to the legal provision that gives them jurisdiction to review “final judgments or decrees” of state supreme courts, as well as a 1975 opinion interpreting an earlier version of that law. The court set a March 20 deadline for the 10-page filings.

As a formal matter, the US Supreme Court is considering only the initial North Carolina Supreme Court decision to strike down the GOP-drawn map, not the later decision upholding a judge-drawn replacement. That distinction could provide an argument for letting the US Supreme Court rule in the case.

North Carolina Republicans are seeking to reinstate a voting map the General Assembly drew to lock in probable GOP victories in 10 of the state’s 14 districts. Under the court-drawn map, the two parties split 7-7 in November’s elections.

The case is Moore v. Harper, 21-1271.

(Adds details about court’s order in fifth paragraph.)

To contact the reporter on this story:
Greg Stohr in Washington at gstohr@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story:
Elizabeth Wasserman at ewasserman2@bloomberg.net

© 2023 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved. Used with permission.