Published 14 hours ago • loading... • Updated 13 hours ago
US Supreme Court's uneven approach to election-map rulings boosts Republicans
The rulings let Texas, Louisiana and Alabama use new congressional maps that could boost Republicans ahead of primaries.
This month, the U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for Louisiana and Alabama to enact pro-Republican voting maps reconfiguring U.S. House of Representatives districts, just days before in-person primary voting began and after thousands of mail-in ballots were cast.
The Supreme Court's actions rely on the "Purcell principle," a legal concept established two decades ago stating courts should avoid altering election rules too close to voting dates to prevent voter confusion and electoral disruption.
University of Kentucky law professor Joshua Douglas argues the "Purcell principle" is inconsistently applied, stating, "Cynics would say this is politics all the way down," noting the court allows Republican-controlled states to implement maps while stopping others.
Last December, the conservative-majority Supreme Court permitted Texas to use a new voting map beneficial to Republicans, faulting a lower court for blocking it "on the eve of an election" when primary elections were four months away.
Legal experts raise questions about the motivations of the justices who hold a 6-3 majority on the court, as these recent decisions fuel the impression that the Supreme Court is aiding Republican electoral goals.