On Tuesday, the Supreme Court declined the invitation to let state legislatures go haywire in administering federal elections—but managed to leave the door wide open for a future nail-biter in the courts. cristianafarias reports:
declining the invitation to let state legislatures go haywire in administering federal elections. “The Elections Clause does not insulate state legislatures from the ordinary exercise of state judicial review,” Roberts wrote in the 6-3 opinion, which stands for the principle that states or even voters, through their own courts,ensure that state lawmakers aren’t doing things they’re not supposed to do.
That’s a sigh of relief for anyone who cares about averting the most legally outlandish aspects of 2020. Joined by justicesRoberts relied on past precedents to make clear that states legislatures simply have no “exclusive and independent authority when setting the rules governing federal elections.” In a sense, this result wasin which the justices gave every indication that they were not willing to wreak havoc in American elections.is powerless to intervene in a future close call.
Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling in favor of the incumbent president over his Republican challenger over some interpretation of Wisconsin election law—an interpretation that is key to deciding the victor by a razor-thin margin not just in the state, but the entire nation. Roberts only notes that such scenarios “are complex and context specific,” and that a state court in that instance may not “arrogate to themselves the power vested in state legislatures to regulate federal elections.
Canada Latest News, Canada Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Supreme Court says state courts can review election law, rejects independent state legislator theoryThe Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that state legislators are not the ultimate authority on how elections are conducted, reasoning that state courts can review election rules enacted by lawmakers.
Read more »
Supreme Court lets lawsuits over team doctor's sexual abuse proceed against Ohio StateThe Supreme Court is leaving in place a decision that allows more than 230 men to sue Ohio State University over decades-old sexual abuse by a university doctor, the late Richard Strauss. Two cases involving the abuse were on a list of many cases the court said it would not hear. Ohio State University had urged the court to review an appeals court ruling that revived lawsuits after they had been dismissed. The men who sued are among hundreds of former student-athletes and other alumni who say they were abused by Strauss. He worked at the school from 1978 to 1998 and killed himself in 2005 at age 67.
Read more »
Supreme Court lets lawsuits over team doctor’s sexual abuse proceed against Ohio StateThe Supreme Court on Monday left in place a decision that allows more than 230 men to sue Ohio State University over decades-old sexual abuse by a university doctor, the late Richard Strauss.
Read more »
Supreme Court lets lawsuits over team doctor's sexual abuse proceed against Ohio StateThe Supreme Court on Monday left in place a decision that allows more than 230 men to sue Ohio State University over decades-old sexual abuse by a university doctor, the late Richard Strauss.
Read more »
Supreme Court lets lawsuits over team doctor’s sexual abuse proceed against Ohio StateOhio State University had urged the court to review a ruling by the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that revived lawsuits that had been dismissed.
Read more »