Former AG Eric Holder praises Supreme Court decisions on voting districts in Alabama, North Carolina

Former Attorney General Eric Holder on Sunday praised the Supreme Court decisions over voting districts in Alabama and North Carolina.

Holder, who served under former President Obama, told CBS's Margaret Brennan on "Face the Nation" that the court's decision over congressional districts in Alabama will have "an impact beyond" its state. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court struck down Alabama's congressional maps and ruled that it likely violates the Voting Rights Act by diminishing the power of Black voters.

"That decision will have an impact beyond the state of Alabama. If you look at Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, they also have instances where the lines have been drawn in such a way to dilute the voting power of African Americans," Holder said. "And again, inconsistent with the Voting Rights Act. And so I think that you will also see courts rule consistent with the Supreme Court's ruling that those lines will have to be redrawn in those states as well."

Holder also said that the Supreme Court's ruling last week that rejected a bid to give state legislatures sweeping authority in drawing congressional maps and regulating federal elections gave him more "confidence" that there will be a fair election in 2024.

"It makes me a lot more confident that we're going to have a fair election come 2024 and that this ridiculous notion of independent state legislature theory will hopefully just go away," Holder said. "That was a as fringe a theory as has ever been heard by the United States Supreme Court. The only disappointment I had in that decision is that it was not a nine to zero decision."

"The notion of the independent state legislature theory was that courts that — that the legislators had the final say, without any involvement of court review," he added. "And that's inconsistent with our notion of checks and balances. It will mean that we will have the ability to go before state courts to look at what legislators and sometimes gerrymandered legislatures are doing with regard to redistricting."

In its ruling, the court declined to endorse the so-called “independent state legislature” theory advanced by North Carolina Republicans and instead ruled to preserve state courts ability to hear partisan gerrymandering lawsuits in congressional redistricting as well as review other federal election rules set by state legislatures.