Good morning and welcome to Supreme Court Brief! This morning, the justices hear arguments in one of its most significant election law cases, Moore v. Harper. We show how Bush v. Gore has played a role in the theory behind the challenge to the North Carolina redistricting case. The justices appear to be "slow out of the gate" with decisions this term. Empirical scholar Adam Feldman offers some data as well as who are the fastest and slowest writers on the court. Plus, scroll down for criticism of some of the justices in Monday's First Amendment arguments.

Thanks for reading. We welcome feedback and tips. Contact Marcia Coyle at [email protected] and follow her on Twitter @MarciaCoyle. 

Bush and Gore masks at The Caucus Room restaurant and bar on election night in 2000. Photo: Patrice Gilbert/ALM

'A Legal Voldemort'

Election law scholar Richard Hasen of the University of California Los Angeles School of Law once called the Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore "a legal Voldemort, a case whose name a court majority has dared not spoken since 2000." The case was cited once since 2000, in a footnote by Justice Clarence Thomas in his dissenting opinion in a 2013 voter registration case, Arizona v. The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona.

But in 2020, we reported how Justice Brett Kavanaugh dusted off Bush v. Gore and the concurring opinion by Chief Justice William Rehnquist to give life to a theory that now figures in this morning's major election case.