Moore v. Harper

[murps2000 86]

Anyone on here following this? I’m surprised there isn’t a topic yet. The outcome of this decision will likely have a dramatic effect on future federal elections. Being a working stiff I only managed to catch some c-span reruns of oral arguments today plus read an article or two.

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2022/12/7/23498507/supreme-court-moore-harper-amy-coney-barrett-democracy-voting-rights-north-carolina
 

https://amp.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article269737826.html

[ryoder 1,590]

In last night's letter, Heather Cox Richardson discusses it:

https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/december-7-2022

[kallend 2,150]

Republicans are again trying to subvert the will of the People.  What's new?

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. 

[murps2000 86]

2 hours ago, ryoder said:

In last night's letter, Heather Cox Richardson discusses it:

https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/december-7-2022

I subscribe to that commie online rag the Atlantic, and she references this article which I happened to catch back in October. 
 

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/moore-v-harper-independent-legislature-theory-supreme-court/671625/

[murps2000 86]

1 hour ago, kallend said:

Republicans are again trying to subvert the will of the People.  What's new?

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. 

I think more specifically that their approach now is to eliminate checks on both state and federal branches of government that they control. It’s straight out of the dictator’s handbook if there ever was one. First take control of the courts, get them to rule in favor of your party, then take control of the voting.

What I find most alarming is that this ruling  could potentially allow the overturning of voter referendum approved systems that are already in place in some states. If that happens you can kiss any hope of ranked choice voting goodbye.

[JerryBaumchen 1,468]

1 hour ago, murps2000 said:

I think more specifically that their approach now is to eliminate checks on both state and federal branches of government that they control. It’s straight out of the dictator’s handbook if there ever was one. First take control of the courts, get them to rule in favor of your party, then take control of the voting.

What I find most alarming is that this ruling  could potentially allow the overturning of voter referendum approved systems that are already in place in some states. If that happens you can kiss any hope of ranked choice voting goodbye.

Hi murps,

IMO with today's USSC, this is the most scary thing on the horizon.

And, you're very correct when you reference the dictator's handbook. 

I mean, who gives a damn about what the people actually want? 

Jerry Baumchen

[JerryBaumchen 1,468]

3 hours ago, ryoder said:

In last night's letter, Heather Cox Richardson discusses it:

https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/december-7-2022

Hi Robert,

I worked on Sen. Wyden's first campaign for the Senate.  I have voted for him every time that I could.  I do not regret any one of those votes.

Jerry Baumchen

[SkyDekker 1,465]

2 hours ago, murps2000 said:

I think more specifically that their approach now is to eliminate checks on both state and federal branches of government that they control. It’s straight out of the dictator’s handbook if there ever was one. First take control of the courts, get them to rule in favor of your party, then take control of the voting.

What I find most alarming is that this ruling  could potentially allow the overturning of voter referendum approved systems that are already in place in some states. If that happens you can kiss any hope of ranked choice voting goodbye.

Agreed that this case is extremely scary when thinking through the possibly outcomes when this doctrine is implemented. Would be very, very hard to return to a democracy after that.

[wmw999 2,589]

5 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

I mean, who gives a damn about what the people actually want? 

Some people are more equal than others

Wendy P 

[JoeWeber 2,941]

2 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Some people are more equal than others

Wendy P 

In this case chicks are more equal than others and Hallelujah! Neal Katyal was a star, absolutely. But Elizabeth Prelogar, our solicitor general, was a rock star. Ketanji Jackson Brown sorted out how to ask the same obvious question differently three times (if a state constitution gives a the legislature an authority does it make sense to conclude that authority could negate the authority granted them by the constitution) Even Amy Coney Barrett grasped the discontinuity. Thanks to the women, again, democracy may not be over.

[ryoder 1,590]

I hope Meathead is right!