USA Today/Gannett: How an upcoming Supreme Court case could upend 2024 election laws, lawsuits

USA Today/Gannett: How an upcoming Supreme Court case could upend 2024 election laws, lawsuits

"The election would have looked very different," if the Supreme Court had embraced the legal theory the North Carolina lawmakers are pushing, said Suzanne Almeida, redistricting and representation counsel for Common Cause. "The scariest piece is that this is a fundamental reimagining of the relationship between state courts, state constitutions and state legislatures that is more likely to undermine the will of the people being upheld."

WASHINGTON – Months before voters went to the polls to choose a president in 2020 a handful of state courts stepped in to make it easier to cast an absentee ballot in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. More often than not, those decisions were supported by the U.S. Supreme Court.

That could change by the time voters line up again in 2024.

The nation’s highest court will consider a bombshell appeal this fall that legal experts say could fundamentally change how federal elections are run, giving state legislatures more power to set voting rules, draw congressional districts and choose slates of presidential electors with less oversight from courts.

Noting that Republicans control a majority of state legislatures, progressives are alarmed over what they see as a coordinated effort to disenfranchise voters and benefit the next GOP presidential nominee. Conservatives counter that some state courts exceeded their authority in 2020 and that elected lawmakers are best positioned to decide how elections should be run.

The case arrives at a moment when the court’s 6-3 conservative majority appears eager to flex its muscle, even if that means overturning precedent supported by a majority of the country. It also comes as polls show Americans are losing faith in elections after years of hearing false claims of widespread fraud from former President Donald Trump and his allies. …

If the Supreme Court had embraced the independent state legislature doctrine before the 2020 election, it likely wouldn’t have changed the outcome. But it may have affected hundreds of lawsuits that were filed across the country.

“The election would have looked very different,” if the Supreme Court had embraced the legal theory the North Carolina lawmakers are pushing, said Suzanne Almeida, redistricting and representation counsel for Common Cause. “The scariest piece is that this is a fundamental reimagining of the relationship between state courts, state constitutions and state legislatures that is more likely to undermine the will of the people being upheld.”