WILL ELECTION RIGGING IN THE COURTS BE AFFIRMED BY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT?
The progressive communist democrats need to complicate election issues to baffle the American public with bullshit and exert their power to influence the outcome of elections.
- The North Carolina General Assembly enacts a new congressional district map responsive to census data.
- Progressive Communist Democrats challenge the General Assembly’s map.
- The North Carolina Supreme Court rejects the legislature’s congressional map.
- The North Carolina General Assembly creates a new remedial map they believe is more responsive to the Court’s requirements.
- The North Carolina Superior Court rejects the proffered legislative map and implements a congressional map of its own making.
- The matter arrives at the U.S. Supreme Court to determine the limit of the Court’s authority with respect to the United States Constitution, which assumes supremacy over a state constitution.
The question before the United States Supreme Court…
Whether a State’s judicial branch may nullify the regulations governing the “Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives . . . prescribed . . . by the Legislature thereof,” U.S. CONST. art. I, § 4, cl. 1, and replace them with regulations of the state courts’ own devising, based on vague state constitutional provisions purportedly vesting the state judiciary with power to prescribe whatever rules it deems appropriate to ensure a “fair” or “free” election. <Moore v. Harper (Docket 21-1271) >
North Carolina’s Supreme Court appears to have usurped exclusive legislative authority when it claimed jurisdiction over setting district boundaries.
This act appears to violate the provisions of the U.S. Constitution’s elections clause Art. I, Sec. 4 which clearly and unambiguously grants the matter to the state’s legislature.
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 choosing Senators.
The legislature is bound by the U.S. Constitution, which assumes supremacy over the state constitution and any state laws; hence the matter of redistricting lies with the legislature, not the Courts (Judicial Branch) or the Governor (Executive Branch). And it is a clear violation of the concept of separation of powers for the Court to assume jurisdiction over the districting issue as if “judicial review,” an authority not granted to the Court in political matters, was adequate justification for the Court to present its own redistricting map.
Why it matters…
This is an issue of electoral integrity and to prevent courts from usurping legislative power, as it is no secret that progressive communist democrats, the party of lawyers, often turn to the courts when their proposals will not withstand a legislative battle or are outside the boundaries of mainstream thought.
Several GOP 2020 and 2022 electoral losses can be directly attributed to election rule changes fought in the courts and spearheaded by the despicable progressive democrat election attorney Mark Elias.
And while there is no specific provision of most state constitutions barring the consideration of partisanship in drawing the boundary lines of legislative districts (gerrymandering), there are issues of fairness that demand attention to redress “fairness of representation” issues. While the courts may consider these matters, the ultimate responsibility should lie with the state legislature.
Yes, the matter is that simple to understand.
And, while the U.S. Supreme Court does not typically review state constitution interpretations by state supreme courts, this matter transcends state issues as it dramatically affects national elections.
The problem is that the liberals on the Court, Associate Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and the ever-squishy Chief Justice John Roberts, often placate the progressive communist democrats rather than use a textual approach to the constitution to inform their decisions.
Can we rely on Associate Justices Brett M. Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett to join Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito, and Neil M. Gorsuch to rein in the judiciary and keep political matters in the political realm where representatives of “We the People decide them?”
We are so screwed.
“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius “A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell “Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar “Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS