The North Carolina Supreme Court found that the state’s courts can’t resolve questions of partisan gerrymandering, overruling a previous decision that struck down the state’s congressional district maps.
When Democrats held a 4-3 majority on the court, they ruled the GOP-drawn maps were a partisan gerrymander. The court now has a 5-2 Republican majority and has reversed its finding.
“Our constitution expressly assigns the redistricting authority to the General Assembly subject to explicit limitations in the text. Those limitations do not address partisan gerrymandering,” state Supreme Court Chief Justice Paul Newby wrote for the majority.
“It is not within the authority of this Court to amend the constitution to create such limitations on a responsibility that is textually assigned to another branch.”
Broader implications: Republican lawmakers appealed the prior Democratic-majority court’s decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has been considering the case on what is known as the “independent state legislature theory.” That theory argues state courts and constitutions can’t limit legislatures’ power to regulate federal elections, The Hill’s Zach Schonfeld explained.
The case could have implications for federal election policies around the country.
But with the North Carolina court’s initial decision now overruled, “the U.S. Supreme Court could dismiss the appeal without reaching the merits,” Schonfeld wrote.
According to longtime Democratic attorney Marc Elias, whose law firm represented the plaintiffs in the North Carolina case, the state Supreme Court’s ruling “is bad news for voters of North Carolina. BUT, with a conservative court in place, this will very likely prevent (or at least delay) the possible limiting of state court review of voter suppression laws elsewhere.”
Read the North Carolina opinion here
