Updates About Supreme Court Rulings

In a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the “independent state legislature theory” in Moore v. Harper.

The case stems from North Carolina’s most-recently drawn congressional map, which was argued to be racially gerrymandered. The North Carolina Supreme Court had ruled that the map was in violation of the state’s constitution, but others argued that the independent state legislature theory allowed the map to be valid. This theory asserts that state legislatures have sole authority to establish federal election laws without review by courts or governors.

Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson issued a statement on the Supreme Court’s decision, stating it was a “victory for Michigan’s citizen-led and voter-enacted independent redistricting process”.

The Michigan Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit brought forward by Governor Gretchen Whitmer that asked the high court to rule on the constitutionality of Michigan’s 1931 law that banned abortions.

With the passage of Proposal 3 in November 2022, the Michigan Supreme Court dismissed Whitmer’s case as moot. This comes after Governor Whitmer asked the court to withdraw her request. The request, which she originally filed following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, kept Michigan’s 1931 ban on abortions from going into effect until residents had a chance to vote on Proposal 3.

On Monday, November 7, Banerian v. Benson, a lawsuit challenging the adopted U.S. House redistricting plan, was dismissed as moot by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The case was filed on January 20, 2022, by a group of Michigan Republicans, including conservative activists, former lawmakers, and at least one sitting lawmaker – Rep Beau LaFave (R-Iron Mountain) –against the Michigan Secretary of State, the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission (ICRC), and the Commission’s members. The lawsuit alleges the adopted redistricting plan violates the U.S. Constitution, specifically the one person, one vote requirement. Plaintiffs also alleged the commissioners defied the communities of interest standard set forth in the Michigan Constitution.

In April, the map was upheld after a three-judge 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel unanimously denied the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction against the new congressional map. Judge Raymond Kethledge, who oversaw the case, wrote that the population deviation was not sufficient to warrant disapproval of the commission’s work. The commission was also said to follow the communities of interest standard. Mr. Kethledge additionally wrote that the plaintiffs did not identify an alternative plan that would better preserve communities’ interests while equally resembling the population.