> This supreme court is actively trying to appear a-political by granting wine reviews while rejecting others, but they save up for the bombshell fringe cases

Literally how the supreme court has run since marybury vs madison. In case you didnt know, the supreme court is part of the judicial branch of the government and thus political by definition. Im not as stupid as the people you are trying to trick with you post.

Also i never said anything otherwise about moore vs harper. I know what it means and i know what is going to happen because of it. go bark up another tree chud. I dont care that you are trying to equate the 2 totally separate issues with each other.

Not to mention YOU missed MY point. This was taken to state court because the state is losing a seat and republicans were crying because now the map is only like 3% gerrymandered to their favor instead of way more that they want. They lost in the state courts and thought they could pull a fast one because the courts were stacked with trump activist judges. Even then it got shot down.

The point you are making is totally unrelated outside of the fact that it has to do with election mapping. Moore v Harper says there is some made up idea that the state legislative branch can do whatever they want in an election and are trying to get the prior mentioned activist judges to give them carte blanche to change the results if they dont like them.