hi there, everyone. it s 4:00 in new york. the very future of our election system hangs in the balance today on a knife s edge today in what has been described as the most important case for american democracy in the 2 1/2 centuries since this morning, the united states supreme court heard oral arguments in a case called moore v harper. it is vital to understand just how fundamental an impact the decision in this case could have on our lives, our kids lives and their kids lives. at the center of this argument is a radical legal theory, one that is supported by john eastman. he, of course, is the architect of donald trump s attempted coup, and one that prominent conservative jurist michael ludig says is a key part of the
do not take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your doctor about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding, or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b, do not stop taking biktarvy without talking to your doctor. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. if you re living with hiv, keep loving who you are. and ask your doctor if biktarvy is right for you. . in the last couple of hours, the u.s. supreme court heard arguments in a case that could completely upend election law, and have a huge impact on our next presidential race. at the center of the case, moore v. harper is whether the justices will embrace a legal argument called the independent legislature theory and what it does, it takes power away from state courts to strike down certain election laws passed by state legislatures. north carolina republicans
arguments in moore v. harper, this is a case that hinges on this independent legislature theory, it essentially would give unchecked power to state legislatures on how congressional elections are conducted. you wrote a piece in the daily beast out this morning where you note the decision to hear the case raises the likelihoods that the conservatives may again be looking to overturn precedent. if i understand this correctly as the person who is not a lawyer, this could essentially do away with all checks and balances and that means the ramifications go far beyond congressional elections and gerrymandering. that s exactly right. i mean, first of all, the chaos that could result just in gerrymandering is enormous and you re exactly right, there would be no checks and balances because the prove nents of this theory read the constitution as giving sole power over elections along the states to the legislature. what that means is not only can state courts not review that
piece. the worst supreme court decision is yet to come. really? in it, you wrote a potentially new path has been opened to allow the big lie crowd to steal the next if thial election. this potentially new path is created by our current extremist supreme court, having recently decided to hear the case of moore v. harper. while the moore v. harper case does not present the facts related to the choosing of a state s electors in a presidential election, it presents the issue of whether the state courts have any rights to review the decisions state legislatures make to holding federal elections. throughout all the illegitimate challenges president trump s legal minions made to the outcome of the 2020 election, it was often state courts, which were the necessary check, throwing those cases out, giving state legislatures supremacy as to their role in