Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-1271_3f14.pdf
Page Number: 14

Cite as:  600 U. S. ____ (2023) 

9 

Opinion of the Court 

future state-court proceedings.”  Id., at 480. 

Harper  I  fits  within  this  second  category  of  cases  de-
scribed  in  Cox  Broadcasting.  By  striking  down  the  2021 
congressional plans enacted by the General Assembly, Har-
per I “finally decided” the “federal issue” whether the Elec-
tions  Clause  insulates  state  legislatures  from  review  by
state courts for compliance with state law.  See 380 N. C., 
at 390–391, 868 S. E. 2d, at 551–552.  That issue both has 
survived  and  requires  decision  because  subsequent  pro-
ceedings have neither altered Harper I ’s analysis of the fed-
eral  issue  nor  negated  the  effect  of  its  judgment  striking
down the 2021 plans.  In its decision “overruling” Harper I, 
the North Carolina Supreme Court in fact reaffirmed that
it retains the authority to review congressional districting
plans for compliance with state law.  Harper, ___ N. C., at 
___, 886 S. E. 2d, at 422. 

That the North Carolina Supreme Court overruled Har-
per I does not affect the judgment in that case for purposes
of §1257(a).  “[T]he res judicata consequences of a final, un-
appealed  judgment  on the  merits”  are  not  “altered  by  the
fact that the judgment may have been wrong or rested on a 
legal  principle  subsequently  overruled  in  another  case.” 
Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. Moitie, 452 U. S. 394, 
398  (1981).  The  North  Carolina  Supreme  Court  has  said
much  the  same.    East  Carolina  Lumber  Co.  v.  West,  247 
N. C. 699, 701, 102 S. E. 2d, 248, 249 (1958) (“An erroneous
or  irregular  judgment  binds  the  parties  thereto  until  cor-
rected in a proper manner.”).  That Court did not purport to 
alter  or  amend  in  any  way  the  judgment  in  Harper  I.  In 
short, the record before us shows that Harper I “finally de-
cided” the Elections Clause issue, which has survived sub-
sequent proceedings in the North Carolina Supreme Court 
such  that  it  continues to  “require  decision”  by  this  Court. 
Cox Broadcasting, 420 U. S., at 480. 

JUSTICE  THOMAS  sees  it  differently.  He  correctly  ob-