Voting rights advocates and legal experts are keeping a close watch on an upcoming Supreme Court case that could have serious implications for the say people have in how they're represented in government. The case is North Carolina's Moore v. Harper, in which the state's Republican legislators have asked that the state's supreme court decision to throw out its gerrymandered congressional map be overturned.
Part of the argument stems from an unconventional reading of a clause in the Constitution that state legislatures and Congress are the only ones authorized to create rules for how elections are held. This understanding is considered a threat that could result in reinstating gerrymandered congressional maps and an inability to challenge discriminatory elections laws and practices.
Derek Muller is the Bouma Fellow of Law at the University of Iowa College of Law, where he teaches on topics related to election law and federal courts. Dan Vicuña is the national redistricting manager at Common Cause, a national organization focused on expansive voting rights and government accountability. They took some time to talk about the concerns around cases like Moore v. Harper, whether the 1965 Voting Rights Act offers sufficient protections to these efforts to concentrate elections power among legislators, and the harm caused by gerrymandering. (These interviews have been edited for length and clarity. For a longer version of these conversations, visit sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-lisa-deaderick-staff.html.)
