Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-309_4f15.pdf
Page Number: 4

2 

CARNEY v. ADAMS 

Opinion of the Court 

Pleas.  The provision says that no more than a bare major-
ity  of  judges  on  any  of  these  courts  “shall  be  of  the  same
political party.”  Ibid.  (We shall call this requirement the 
“bare majority” requirement.)  The Delaware Constitution 
also  contains  a  second  requirement  applicable  only  to  the 
Supreme  Court,  the  Chancery  Court,  and  the  Superior 
Court.  It says that the remaining members of those three 
courts (those not in the bare majority) “shall be of the other 
major political party.”  Ibid.  (We shall call this the “major
party” requirement.)  Thus, all five courts are subject to the 
“bare majority” requirement, and three of the five courts are 
additionally subject to the “major party” requirement. 

On February 21, 2017, plaintiff-respondent James R. Ad-
ams  sued  Delaware’s  Governor,  John  Carney,  in  Federal 
District Court.  Adams, then a newly registered political in-
dependent,  claimed  that  both  of  Delaware’s  political  bal-
ance  requirements  violated  his  First  Amendment  right  to 
freedom of association by making him ineligible to become
a judge unless he rejoined a major political party.

Governor Carney moved to dismiss for lack of standing, 
and  Adams  filed  an  amended  complaint  in  an  attempt  to
rectify  the  problem.    App.  1–2,  17–18.  After  discovery
largely centered on Adams’ history and intentions in seek-
ing a judgeship, the parties cross-moved for summary judg-
ment.  Governor  Carney  argued  (1)  that  Adams  lacked
standing to assert his constitutional claim, and (2) that, in 
any  event,  the  requirements  were  constitutional.    Adams 
argued only that he was entitled to summary judgment on 
the merits because the political balance requirements made
independents like him ineligible for a judgeship. 

The  District  Court  denied  Governor  Carney’s  summary
judgment motion.  Id., at 165; App. to Pet. for Cert. 83a.  It 
held that Adams had standing to challenge both the “major 
party” requirement for membership on the Supreme Court,
the Chancery Court, and the Superior Court and the “bare
majority” requirement for membership on the Family Court