Carney v. Adams

The case asks whether a Delaware lawyer had standing (a legal right to sue) to challenge the state's rules requiring political balance on its top courts. It also raises a First Amendment question about whether Delaware can reserve some judgeships for members of the two major parties, which the lawyer says shuts out independents like him.

No argument has been scheduled yet, so there is no vote to report. The key issues are whether the challenger can sue at all and whether Delaware's party-balance rules violate the First Amendment.

This fight affects who can be considered for judgeships in Delaware's major courts. For example, an independent lawyer who wants to become a judge says the state constitution blocks him unless he joins a major party.

The next milestone is oral argument or another scheduling move from the Court. No decision window is available yet.

The case asks whether an independent Delaware lawyer can challenge rules that reserve some top judgeships for members of the two major parties. It also asks whether he has standing to sue.

It could affect who is eligible for Delaware judgeships and whether independents are effectively excluded. That matters for lawyers seeking judgeships and for how states structure politically balanced courts.

Watch for the Court to schedule oral argument or take another procedural step. That will show whether the justices are ready to dig into standing and the First Amendment questions.