Maps in Four States Were Ruled Illegal Gerrymanders. They’re Being Used Anyway (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    zztop

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Feb 5, 2020
    Messages
    3,040
    Reaction score
    3,652
    Location
    in a van down by the river
    Offline
    This is why I have no faith in this country anymore


    David Wasserman, who follows congressional redistricting for the Cook Political Report, said that using rejected maps in the four states, which make up nearly 10 percent of the seats in the House, was likely to hand Republicans five to seven House seats that they otherwise would not have won.

    Some election law scholars say they are troubled by the consequences in the long run.

    “We’re seeing a revolution in courts’ willingness to allow elections to go forward under illegal or unconstitutional rules,” Richard L. Hasen, a professor at the U.C.L.A. School of Law and the director of its Safeguarding Democracy Project, said in an interview. “And that’s creating a situation in which states are getting one free illegal election before they have to change their rules.”

    Behind much of the change is the Supreme Court’s embrace of an informal legal doctrine stating that judges should not order changes in election procedures too close to an actual election. In a 2006 case, Purcell v. Gonzalez, the court refused to stop an Arizona voter ID law from taking effect days before an election because that could “result in voter confusion and consequent incentive to remain away from the polls.”

    The Purcell principle, as it is called, offers almost no guidance beyond that. But the Supreme Court has significantly broadened its scope in this decade, mostly through rulings on applications that seek emergency relief such as stays of lower court rulings, in which the justices’ reasoning often is cryptic or even unexplained.
     
    I'm curious to know how many of these "ruby red" states are under minority rule.

    this does not exactly answer what you asked, but I tried to find some info... this is the best I came up with w/o spending too much time on it:

    Gerrymandering — and an assist from the U.S. Supreme Court — helped Republicans win the majority.

    Overall Outcome: -at least 6 Democratic seats
    ---
    Also, despite conventional wisdom to the contrary, the number of competitive congressional districts has increased since 2012. Based on calculations by the Gerrymandering Project and metrics available on Dave’s Redistricting App, I estimated that 47 districts would have a partisan margin of seven points or fewer, a zone that serves as a measure of competitiveness. Preliminary election results show 53 such districts. Contrast this with 2012, when only 33 districts met this criterion. Much of the increase can be attributed to the work of newly independent redistricting commissions in Michigan and Colorado, as well as court actions in New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.
    ---

    This last one is the most interesting to me b/c it has visual representation of the process but it is more limited in scope (includes some areas in NC and TX)
     
    Go, Ohio!

    1692126025494.png
     
    Something like having a commission like this propose two different maps for the state, then having the public vote on the map to use for the next election would be much better than what we have now.

    The power to draw the lines needs to be as diffused as practical.
     
    I have a real disdain for gerrymandering. Even if it favors my side in some states, something about it just seems wrong. John Oliver did a piece a few years ago about it, and how in some cases it can be used for good. But overall it just seems like a tool to unfairly hold power/control in a state

     
    I have a real disdain for gerrymandering. Even if it favors my side in some states, something about it just seems wrong. John Oliver did a piece a few years ago about it, and how in some cases it can be used for good. But overall it just seems like a tool to unfairly hold power/control in a state



    I agree. That's why I'm not favor of minority districts that are heavily gerrymandered. It's good to have majority minority districts if the lines seem logical, but when is heavily gerrymandered you dilute more balanced minority representation in other districts and you get more extremes. We'd be much better off if redistricting was done by Independent Redistricting Commissions.
     
    GOP officially doesn’t care about following the law anymore. They are an outlaw party.
    Having lawlessness accepted, and sometimes condoned, is the first step towards a failed state. Respect for and enforcement of laws is the primary thing that separates 1st world from 3rd world states. Education needs to reinforce this, because I don't remember that ever being taught, but it is crucial!
     
    Having lawlessness accepted, and sometimes condoned, is the first step towards a failed state. Respect for and enforcement of laws is the primary thing that separates 1st world from 3rd world states. Education needs to reinforce this, because I don't remember that ever being taught, but it is crucial!

    This is why I have had a sinking feeling for a few years now, that republican controlled states are deliberately sabotaging education and gutting funding etc, in order to intentionally keep their citizens ignorant
     
    Well, some good news. But honestly there should ideally be some kind of severe consequences to what the republicans did:


    A special master will be appointed to redraw a "remedial map to ensure that a plan can be implemented as part of an orderly process in advance of elections, where the State was given an opportunity to enact a compliant map but failed to do so," the judges wrote.


    “We are disturbed by the evidence that the State delayed remedial proceedings but ultimately did not even nurture the ambition to provide the required remedy,” the three-judge panel wrote in a 217-page order Tuesday. “And we are struck by the extraordinary circumstance we face.”
     
    Well, some good news. But honestly there should ideally be some kind of severe consequences to what the republicans did:


    A special master will be appointed to redraw a "remedial map to ensure that a plan can be implemented as part of an orderly process in advance of elections, where the State was given an opportunity to enact a compliant map but failed to do so," the judges wrote.


    “We are disturbed by the evidence that the State delayed remedial proceedings but ultimately did not even nurture the ambition to provide the required remedy,” the three-judge panel wrote in a 217-page order Tuesday. “And we are struck by the extraordinary circumstance we face.”

    Good thing systemic racism isn't a thing, or it would be so much worse. :rolleyes:
     
    I don't want them creating districts based on race.

    I get why it was done, but i think the negative outweighs the good now.

    What I want are more competitive districts. By isolating the black vote, it creates safe red districts. I'd rather Alabama have 4 purple districts than 2 black ones.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom