On Dec. 7, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Moore v. Harper regarding the question of gerrymandering by the North Carolina legislature in its congressional map. The legislature is asking the court to buy into what is known as the independent state legislature theory. It advances the idea that when state legislatures draft rules and laws that have to do with federal elections, they should have unchecked authority. In other words, when state legislators write the rules for federal elections, the checks and balances among the branches of government that have existed for more than 230 years should be removed.
The independent state legislature theory puts critical components of our democracy in jeopardy. Democracy is most effective when there is a strong system of checks and balances.
State legislatures make laws regulating and administering federal elections that are subject to the state and U.S. constitutions. The executive branch either signs them into law or vetoes them. If challenged, the judicial branch determines if any of those laws are valid.
The independent state legislature theory is anything but democratic because it means there would be no mechanism by which to hold any state legislature accountable: There would be no ability for the citizenry to challenge election laws in court or the executive branch to challenge such laws by veto.
Democracy cannot function if the citizens believe that the government works only for a select few and if they believe that the public interest is not being heeded. Maintaining checks and balances provides uniform rules and certainty for every election in a state. It ensures that every voter, as well as every candidate, understands the rules. The independent state legislature theory undoes that certainty because rules between federal and state elections could begin to differ drastically.
When everyone knows the rules of the game and knows that those rules will be fairly enforced, everyone can trust the results. The way federal elections are currently administered is far from perfect. But with the aid of checks and balances and with opportunities to strengthen public trust, constant improvement is possible.
— Jackson Paller, community lawyer, Citizen Advocacy Center, Elmhurst
Public accommodation laws
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis (the state of Colorado). The owner of 303 Creative, Lorie Smith, has asserted that forcing her to create custom websites for same-sex weddings would constitute “compelled speech,” a violation of the First Amendment. The state of Colorado defended its public accommodation laws, which include sexual orientation and transgender status. It argued that this case is about discrimination in a public accommodation.
This case is the latest in a long line of litigation that has pitted private businesses against state and federal public accommodation laws.
In 2022, I wonder if the federal and state public accommodation laws are necessary. When Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was enacted, Jim Crow laws existed, and overt discrimination in businesses and other public accommodations was accepted or tolerated in many communities. In small and medium-size towns, Black citizens would have had few to no alternatives to businesses that refused to serve them. Fifty-eight years ago, these laws were necessary.
If these laws were to be repealed today, it’s likely that some businesses would discriminate in any or all of the categories covered by the laws. They could even display offensive signs declaring their bigotry. Let them do it! The public retribution would be swift — imagine the storm on social media — and economically painful. Besides losing the customers that they don’t want to serve, these businesses would also lose a significant portion of the customers they prefer, creating vacuums in those markets and opportunities for entrepreneurs to create alternatives to fill those vacuums.
I would prefer the immediate repudiation of the marketplace to the protracted and narrow opinions of the courts.
— Randy Harris, Campton Hills
Thank a civics teacher
Thursday is Bill of Rights Day, marking 231 years since the first 10 amendments to the United States Constitution were ratified.
The Bill of Rights protects some of the most basic freedoms we enjoy as Americans. While Bill of Rights Day may not be widely commemorated, there is a simple way to honor the occasion.
Thank your local civics and history teachers. They have some of the most important — and often underappreciated — jobs in our country today.
At the Bill of Rights Institute, we work with more than 60,000 civics and history teachers nationwide. These teachers help students examine the story of America and understand their rights and responsibilities as citizens.
In civics classes across our country, students are learning how our government functions, the skills of good citizenship, how to solve problems in their communities and how to resolve differences through civil discourse.
Civics education is essential both for the current function and the future of our country.
Take a moment on Thursday to honor our civics and history teachers. Their work matters — and they’ve earned it.
— David Bobb, president and CEO, Bill of Rights Institute, Arlington, Virginia
Walking Man a gentle soul
As a street photographer for more than 35 years, I had numerous encounters with the Walking Man. We never talked much; he was a quiet, gentle soul who kept to himself. He never seemed to have a mean bone in his body, as they say.
A few times, I asked for a picture, and on three or four, he agreed.
His death is a tragedy.
— Randy Martens, Chicago
Join the conversation in our Letters to the Editor Facebook group.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
