Author Topic: Redrawing America [gerrymandering case]  (Read 316 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 240B

  • Lord of all things Orange!
  • TBR Advisory Committee
  • ***
  • Posts: 25,949
    • I try my best ...
Redrawing America [gerrymandering case]
« on: March 13, 2018, 10:43:36 am »

Washington Examiner
by Melissa Quinn
March 13, 2018 12:01 AM

For the first time in more than a decade, the U.S. Supreme Court is taking a serious look at partisan gerrymandering, with two cases before the justices that could have significant impacts on the redistricting process after the 2020 census.

In October, the justices heard oral arguments in the case Gill v. Whitford, a case that challenged the constitutionality of state legislative districts drawn by Wisconsin Republicans after the 2010 census.

The case marked the first time since 2004 that the justices have taken up the issue of partisan gerrymandering, the practice of redrawing districts in a way that benefits a certain political party.

Then, the Supreme Court surprised many court watchers in December, when the justices agreed to hear a second, more narrow, case out of Maryland.

The justices will hear oral arguments in that case, Benisek v. Lamone, March 28.

To some redistricting experts, the time has finally arrived for the Supreme Court to create a standard for determining when partisan gerrymandering crosses the boundaries into territory that violates the Constitution.

And they’re hopeful the justices are poised to do just that come June, when rulings in the Wisconsin and Maryland cases are expected.

If the court determines extreme partisan gerrymandering violates the Constitution, the decision could have a significant impact on how state lawmakers draw legislative and congressional boundaries in the future, with the most immediate round of redistricting occurring after the 2020 census.

Such a decision from the justices would particularly affect Republicans, who control a majority of state legislatures and oversee the redistricting process in those states.

If the justices decide the courts can weigh in on claims of gerrymandering, some fear their victory could invite a flood of challenges to current and future maps, especially after the next census. The potential for the courts to be inundated with such cases was of concern to Chief Justice John Roberts during oral arguments for the Wisconsin case in October.

But others believe the court has no business intervening in the redistricting process at all, as the authority to draw voting maps rests not with the judiciary, but with state legislatures.

“If they’re ever going to deliver, now is the time,” Justin Levitt, a Loyola Law School law professor and redistricting expert, said. “That’s not a partisan statement. When a party has unilateral control, they tend to abuse it, and that’s not a Republican or Democratic thing.”

In search of a ‘workable standard’

(more)
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/redrawing-america
You cannot "COEXIST" with people who want to kill you.
If they kill their own with no conscience, there is nothing to stop them from killing you.
Rational fear and anger at vicious murderous Islamic terrorists is the same as irrational antisemitism, according to the Leftists.