HawgGoneIt Posted January 24, 2018 Report Share Posted January 24, 2018 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-politics-pennsylvania/pennsylvania-court-orders-new-congressional-map-due-to-gerrymandering-idUSKBN1FB2N8 The worst part of this entire news story is at the very end... The March special election will go on before the redrawing. Seems to me, if the district lines are unconstitutional, no election should be allowed until the districts are correctly drawn. Anyway, the gerrymandering mess needs to be gotten under control either way. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted January 24, 2018 Report Share Posted January 24, 2018 Not sure how “seeking partisan advantage” is unconstitutional. The drawing of state district lines is a responsibility of the legislature and inherently involves seeking political advantage. This sounds like a rogue court deciding because they disagreed with the politics of the line drawers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted January 24, 2018 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2018 5 minutes ago, Bormio said: Not sure how “seeking partisan advantage” is unconstitutional. The drawing of state district lines is a responsibility of the legislature and inherently involves seeking political advantage. This sounds like a rogue court deciding because they disagreed with the politics of the line drawers. Yeah I'm not totally up to snuff on what makes this unconstitutional either. I do know that some districts in North Carolina were being forced to redraw as well. Something about race there. Anyway, in a state where they have a district drawn so screwy that it's being hailed as "Goofy Kicking Donald Duck" I'm sure there's something amiss. I don't think redistricting should involve seeking political advantage, but, I know that it always has and always will. Sometimes these things are getting pretty extreme though, and this is evidently one of those places. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted January 24, 2018 Report Share Posted January 24, 2018 Race could raise constitutional issues, but not “seeking partisan advantage”. Winners draw the lines. As you know in the South, Republicans and African-Americans teamed up to create “majority minority” districts in exchange for more Republican districts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted January 24, 2018 Report Share Posted January 24, 2018 9 hours ago, Bormio said: Not sure how “seeking partisan advantage” is unconstitutional. mid 80's, under Ray-Gun, SCOTUS ruled partisan gerrymandering violated the Equal Protection Clause Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted January 24, 2018 Report Share Posted January 24, 2018 24 minutes ago, noonereal said: mid 80's, under Ray-Gun, SCOTUS ruled partisan gerrymandering violated the Equal Protection Clause The SC set no standard and the practical effect is that it is impossible to prove or establish. Every gerrymander is for partisan political advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted January 24, 2018 Report Share Posted January 24, 2018 1 minute ago, Bormio said: The SC set no standard and the practical effect is that it is impossible to prove or establish. Every gerrymander is for partisan political advantage. the fact remains, it is not legal, that is all I spoke to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted January 24, 2018 Report Share Posted January 24, 2018 Just now, noonereal said: the fact remains, it is not legal, that is all I spoke to It is meaningless, every gerrymander is political and the SC set no guidelines to say which “illegal” gerrymanders should be allowed and which should not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted January 24, 2018 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2018 2 hours ago, Bormio said: It is meaningless, every gerrymander is political and the SC set no guidelines to say which “illegal” gerrymanders should be allowed and which should not. So basically, if someone comes forth with a compelling argument against the way a district has been redrawn, it comes down to a decision by the courts with no real guidelines. If the gerrymandering in and of itself is "illegal" per that supreme court decision, then it seems like it could be a judgement call in every area in every state as to what is legal or illegaly drawn lines. May be time to bring forth suits in many states in this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted January 24, 2018 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2018 38 minutes ago, Sportsnut said: been going on for years here in Georgia. Yes. Super majorities aren't good enough here, they still redraw to divide even more than they already have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSFBfan Posted February 1, 2018 Report Share Posted February 1, 2018 Not so fast.....North Carolina does not have to redraw their maps http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/supreme-court-halts-north-carolina-redistricting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted February 1, 2018 Report Share Posted February 1, 2018 5 minutes ago, Sportsnut said: But what if the lines are drawn to separate by race or class? That is how it has been done for years here in Georgia. That is why some states need congressional approval on redrawing district lines. The lines in Georgia were often drawn by white Republicans AND black Democrats agreeing - more GOP districts AND more majority minority districts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.