The court held that the Constitution imposes some limits on the way state courts interpret their own state constitutions. These limits also apply to the way state courts interpret state election statutes — as well as the way state election administrators apply state election statutes in federal elections. Yet the court offers no guidance, no standard at all, for lower courts to know when a state court has gone too far. Indeed, the court announced this constitutional constraint but avoided telling us even whether the North Carolina Supreme Court — in the decision the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed — had violated this vague limitation. But the state court interpreted general provisions in the state constitution — such as that requiring elections to be “free and fair” — to in effect ban partisan gerrymandering.

---

Persons: ”, — Organizations: North Carolina, U.S, Supreme Locations: —