Texas gerrymandering case before Supreme Court could change state's political map

[Elderberry]

Houston Chronicle by Kevin Diaz 4/20/2018

The nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court will take their seats Tuesday morning to hear a case that could remake the political map of Texas.

Hidden in the legalese of “interlocutory injunctions” and “statutory defects” is this simple question for the justices to dissect: Did the Republican-led state Legislature purposely draw its last legislative and congressional boundaries to subvert the voting power of Latino and African-American voters?

The answer, expected by June, could influence the racial and partisan makeup of the state’s political districts, culminating a long, high-stakes legal battle that has the potential to turn Texas a little more blue.

A possible finding of voting rights violations also could force the Lone Star State back under federal supervision for future election disputes, a civil rights remedy associated with the state’s segregationist past. Texas only got removed from federal preclearance requirements in 2013. Restrictions requiring strict federal scrutiny of all elections had been in place since the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

More: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/politics/texas/article/Gerrymandering-case-could-change-the-political-12851565.php

[Sanguine]

Since the state’s political boundaries came under challenge after the 2010 census, the case has involved at least 10 different plaintiff groups, the Justice Department, two Texas governors and several alliances of African-American and Hispanic voters.

“They silenced the voices of minorities at the ballot box,” said Texas Democratic Party Chair Gilberto Hinojosa, accusing Republicans of “stacking the deck” by drawing lines to both pack together and separate people of color to dilute their voting strength.

Hard to tell exactly who brought the suit.

Also, SJL and Al Green may be very uncomfortable about the idea of redistricting.

[Elderberry]

Hard to tell exactly who brought the suit.

Also, SJL and Al Green may be very uncomfortable about the idea of redistricting.

By Mark Gersh CBS News September 21, 2011,

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/redistricting-journal-showdown-in-texas-reasons-and-implications-for-the-house-and-hispanic-vote/

Opponents of the plan - including plaintiffs in a legal challenge against it - argue that the massive Hispanic growth would give that community more than 9 districts. By the numbers, if the total number of Hispanic districts matched the population show in proportion, 13 or 14 districts would be allocated to the Hispanic population. There are also 3 African-American plurality districts in Texas, and the Black share of the state population grew by more than 20 percent since 2000.

Whether or not this argument prevails is an open question. While 37.5 percent of the Texas population is Hispanic, its share of the voting age population is far lower - 24 percent. Some have also raised questions about the Texas census data, both in terms of a potential undercount, but also the American Community Survey regarding citizenry.

A San Antonio court is the venue for the legal confrontation between a myriad of groups, including the Mexican-American Legal and Education Fund and the Republican state officials. A three judge court - including two Hispanics, one of whom was appointed by former Governor George W. Bush - has promised a timely decision. But will it matter? It is now expected that a panel of federal judges in DC will decide whether the Texas plan violates the Voting Rights Act, likely before the San Antonio trial is over. If the plan is nullified, the judges in San Antonio, in all probability, will draw a new map.

[MajorClay]

Supreme Court

[Elderberry]

It just took seven years to get there.

[Elderberry]

Texas redistricting case’s oral arguments at U.S. Supreme Court focus on jurisdiction debate

https://www.texastribune.org/2018/04/24/texas-redistricting-supreme-court-arguments-jurisdiction/

As the U.S. Supreme Court took up Texas' redistricting case, several justices questioned whether they even had the authority to pick up where a lower court left off.

by Alexa Ura April 24, 2018 Updated: 5 PM

The stakes in the fight over Texas’ political maps couldn’t be much higher.

While 11 political districts are on the line, the U.S. Supreme Court could weigh in on how much say voters of color have in electing who represents them. And the possibility that the state’s election laws could be placed back under federal oversight has been raised.

But as the high court’s justices took up the case Tuesday, they spent much of their time questioning whether they even had the authority to pick up where a lower court left off. That court ruled that Texas lawmakers intentionally discriminated against Hispanic and black voters when they drew boundaries for congressional and state House districts.

Standing before the nine justices in a packed courtroom, Texas Solicitor General Scott Keller was barely minutes into arguing that there was no evidence mapmakers acted with a discriminatory purpose when the court’s liberal justices interrupted and asked why the court should consider the case when the state hadn’t been prevented from using its current maps for the upcoming elections.

“What does the piece of paper say here?” a visibly annoyed Justice Stephen Breyer said, pointing to an August order by a three-judge federal panel in San Antonio that found the state acted nefariously in adopting maps that undercut the voting strength of Hispanics. The court indicated that several districts needed to be redrawn but didn’t explicitly say the state couldn't use the maps for the upcoming elections.

"It seems to me the piece of paper says 'come to court,'" Breyer added. "Now, if we're going to call that grant of an injunction, we're going to hear 50,000 appeals."

[Elderberry]

Federal appellate court upholds embattled Texas voter ID law

https://www.texastribune.org/2018/04/27/5th-circuit-decision-texas-voter-id/

The U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld Texas' voter identification law, reversing a lower court ruling that found it discriminated against voters of color.

by Alexa Ura April 27, 2018

Amid efforts to prove Texas' embattled voter ID law is discriminatory, a federal appeals panel on Friday OK'd state lawmakers' efforts to rewrite the law last year to address faults previously identified by the courts.

On a 2-1 vote, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s ruling that tossed out the state's revisions through Senate Bill 5. The lower court had said the changes did not absolve Texas lawmakers from responsibility for discriminating against voters of color when they crafted one of the nation’s strictest voter ID laws in 2011.

But the Legislature "succeeded in its goal" of addressing flaws in the voter ID law in 2017, Judge Edith Jones wrote in the majority opinion for the divided panel, and the lower court acted prematurely when it "abused its discretion" in ruling to invalidate SB 5.

The 5th Circuit panel’s ruling is a major victory for the state after years of losses in an almost seven-year legal battle over its restrictions on what forms of identification are accepted at the polls.

The battle dates back to 2011, when lawmakers first passed the voter ID restrictions. A separate three-judge panel and then the full 5th Circuit — which is considered to be among the country’s most conservative appellate courts — previously agreed with U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos that the 2011 law disproportionately burdened voters of color who are less likely to have one of the seven forms of identification the state required them to show at the polls.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Republicans winning will soon be against the law.

[Victoria33]

@Elderberry
@mystery-ak

Here is when and why and how lines are drawn in Texas:
They are re-drawn after every nation wide census.
They are re-drawn because population grows and people move from one place to another.
This is how they are drawn according to laws on the books how to do it:
County:
There is a limit to the number of people who can be in a county precint.  After the national census, if a precinct has too many people in it, a new precinct must be drawn, bringing down the number in the over populated precinct to the accepted amount.  The County Commissioners' court has the responsibility to re-draw the lines.
State:
There is a limit to the number of people who can be in a state voting district.  After the national census, if a district has too many people in it, a new district line must be drawn, bringing down the number in the over populated district to the accepted number in it.

The Lt. Governor has the responsibility for appointing a committee to re-draw the lines.  The Lt. Governor in Texas is a Republican, so he appoints Republicans to be on the committee.  He can choose whomever he wants.  After one census, I had two friends who were on this committee and they kept me advised as they went through the process.  This is not quickly done.  The lines are drawn as much as they can be so the district is connected throughout - one solid piece of land, not a bit here, skipping over another area, picking a bit here and skipping over to another area, picking a bit there.  If that happens, it means it is a gerrymandered district - choosing who is in it based on voting, rather than just numbers of people.

There is one gerrymandered district in the Houston area.  It was done on pupose a number of years ago.  It looks like a puzzle piece, bits chosen here and there.  That was done to create a black voting district - Sheila Jackson Lee has been the Representative since it was created. 

Texas Democat Legislators have complained for years because Republicans have drawn the lines.  One year, a number of Democrats left the state, went into New Mexico and Oklahoma so they wouldn't be there and lines could not be voted on.  Texas Rangers were used to get them back into the state.