Quo vadis American democracy after the Moore vs. Harper case?

Contenido principal del artículo

Dimitris Liakopoulos


This work aims to highlight some positions of a personal and above all critical nature following a recent ruling dating back to 27 June 2023 by the Supreme Court. A fight between federal and state courts is certainly not obvious and the role of judges and the theory of independent state legislature are topics under discussion. What creates interpretation problems for us are the opinions of judges, especially their role in various cases after 2020 in the United States that creates concerns for the future of electoral elections in the United States as well as many doubts in the sector of democracy in the arena of elections for the near future.

Detalles del artículo

Cómo citar
Liakopoulos, D. (2024). Quo vadis American democracy after the Moore vs. Harper case?. Derecho Global. Estudios Sobre Derecho Y Justicia, 9(27: Julio-Octubre), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.32870/dgedj.v9i27.729
Artículos de investigación
Biografía del autor/a

Dimitris Liakopoulos, Center of European and International Justice, USA

Professor of International Law, Law of the European Union, International and European Criminal and Procedural Law in various Universities in the United States and Europe. Director of the CEIJ (Center of European and International Justice, New York) Attorney.


Bondurant, E.J. (2021). Rucho v. common cause. A critique. Emory Law Journal, 70, 1051ss.

Brown, E. (2022, June, 11). Ginni Thomas pressed 29 Ariz. Lawmakers to help overturn Trump s defeat, emails show. The Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2022/06/10/ginni-thomas-election-arizona-lawmakers/).

Brown, M. (2021, August, 8). Trump DOJ official Jeffrey Clark pushed acting AG to interfere in Georgia election: report. USA Today: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/08/08/trump-doj- official-urged-acting-ag-pressure-georgia-election/5531371001/)

Hall, M.I. (2008). The partially prudential doctrine of mootness. George Washington Law Review, 77, 554ss.

Kates, D.B., Barker, W.T., (1974). Mootness in judicial proceedings: Towards a coherent theory. California Law Review, 62, 1387ss.

Krent, H.J. (2001). Judging judging: The problem of second-guessing State judges interpretation of State law in Bush v. Gore. Florida State University Law Review, 29, 493, 529-530.

Lund, N. (2012). From Baker v. Carr to Bush v. Gore, and back. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 62, 949ss.

MacGuidwin, S.T. (2023). Mooting unilateral mootness. Michigan Law Review, 121, 642ss.

McKinney, W.C. (2022). The modern origins and evolution of the North Carolina political question doctrine. Campbell Law Review, 44, 202ss.

Morley, M.T. (2015). The intratextual independent “legislature” and the elections clause. Northwestern University Law Review, 109, 132ss

Morley, M.T. (2020). The Independent State Legislature doctrine, federal elections, and State constitutions. Georgia Law Review, 55, 4ss.

Morley, M.T. (2021). The Independent State Legislature doctrine. Fordham Law Review, 90, 502ss.

Schweigert, B.J. (2008). Now for a clean sweep!": Smiley v. Holm, partisan gerrymandering, and at-large congressional elections. Michigan Law Review, 107, 136ss.

Smith, H.H. (2022). Revisiting the history of the Independent State Legislature Doctrine. St. Mary’s Law Journal, 53, 448ss.

Weingartner, M. (2023). Liquidating the Independent State Legislature Theory. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 46, 138ss.