Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

931

In Moore v. Harper, SCOTUS held that the U.S. Constitution’s Elections Clause ‘does not vest exclusive and independent authority in state legislatures to set the rules regarding federal elections.’

“For the first time, the Supreme Court has ruled definitively that there is a limit to the power of state courts to interpret election law,” said Jason Snead, executive director of the Honest Elections Project, in a statement. “Today’s ruling keeps alive the left-wing drive to abuse the courts for partisan gain, but it is no blank check for judges to embrace Marc Elias’ fringe and novel legal theories in order to skew the rules of democracy in favor of the Left.”

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion and was joined by Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch dissented. Roberts wrote, “[S]tate courts do not have free rein,” even though legislatures are not exempt from “ordinary constraints imposed by state law.”

[Source.](https://thefederalist.com/2023/06/27/new-scotus-ruling-limits-state-court-interference-with-election-laws/) > In Moore v. Harper, SCOTUS held that the U.S. Constitution’s Elections Clause ‘does not vest exclusive and independent authority in state legislatures to set the rules regarding federal elections.’ > “For the first time, the Supreme Court has ruled definitively that there is a limit to the power of state courts to interpret election law,” said Jason Snead, executive director of the Honest Elections Project, in a statement. “Today’s ruling keeps alive the left-wing drive to abuse the courts for partisan gain, but it is no blank check for judges to embrace Marc Elias’ fringe and novel legal theories in order to skew the rules of democracy in favor of the Left.” > Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion and was joined by Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch dissented. Roberts wrote, “[S]tate courts do not have free rein,” even though legislatures are not exempt from “ordinary constraints imposed by state law.”

(post is archived)

[–] • 0 pt

This is a much more complicated ruling than it seems. What the Supreme Court actually is saying is it the state legislature has the power in the Constitution to set election laws in each state. State courts cannot overrule the legislature in doing that. And then the court says the federal courts can make rulings on whether or not the state courts are improperly overruling the state legislatures. So it's a very complicated ruling and it really depends on who controls the state legislature as to what the effect on state elections laws are. And that's pretty much what the Constitution says. So when Republican state legislatures were doing certain things for election laws and then Democrat state courts would come in and try to overrule that this Supreme Court decision actually says it's okay for the federal courts to tell the state courts they can't do that.

Now of course if it's a Democrat legislature and it's a republican court that wants to overrule them well then the Republican courts s out of luck. But the Constitution wants the state legislatures to be the primary determining factor and how a state election is done.

so what that means is if you want to have constitutional elections that represent what the constitutional originally said you better be sure you control the state legislature.