Opinion: Will the Supreme Court unleash a frenzy of GOP partisan gerrymandering?
Opponents of partisan gerrymandering speak out at a rally in Washington on Tuesday. By Paul Waldman Paul Waldman Opinion writer covering politics Email Bio Follow Opinion writer March 26 at 3:05 PM The Supreme Court took up a question on Tuesday with profound implications for whether we have a democracy that runs on something resembling fair rules, and things look pretty shaky.
But once again, conservative justices, who make up the majority on the court, wondered how the judiciary should intervene in what is an inherently political process, and what standard would guide how to determine excess. But there is a difficult practical question: Even if almost anyone would look at North Carolina and Maryland and agree that their district maps are ridiculous, how can you determine where the line is between a permissible gerrymander and an impermissible one?
Justice Neil M. Gorsuch suggested that if there was a problem with extreme partisan gerrymandering, voters could take care of it, as they did in five states in the fall where citizen initiatives reigned in legislatures. Let me refer you to a case the court decided in 2015 called Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, before Gorsuch and Kavanaugh joined. By 5-4, that case upheld nonpartisan redistricting commissions established by voter initiative, of just the kind Gorsuch is referring to.
Brasil Últimas Notícias, Brasil Manchetes
Similar News:Você também pode ler notícias semelhantes a esta que coletamos de outras fontes de notícias.
Supreme Court conservatives question challenges of partisan gerrymanderingConservative justices suggested on Tuesday that the Supreme Court should not get involved in fights over the use of politics to draw congressional district lines
Consulte Mais informação »
Hogan, Schwarzenegger urge Supreme Court to act on partisan gerrymanderingMaryland’s Republican governor, mulling a White House run, vocally opposes his state’s redistricting system.
Consulte Mais informação »
Supreme Court appears likely to leave issue of partisan gerrymandering to statesThe court heard challenges to congressional maps that locked in an advantage for Republicans in North Carolina and that gave an extra seat to Democrats in Maryland.
Consulte Mais informação »
Holder, Schwarzenegger: Supreme Court must end partisan gerrymanderingThe former attorney general and the actor made the call as the high court heard arguments on the issue.
Consulte Mais informação »
Supreme Court again tackles whether to stop partisan gerrymanderingThe Supreme Court on Tuesday will not have to debate whether a group of North Carolina politicians deliberately redrew election maps to give their party the maximum partisan advantage. The state’s Republican leaders admitted to doing exactly that.
Consulte Mais informação »
Supreme Court will hear 2 critical partisan gerrymander casesOn the eve of the next census, which will trigger most legislatures across the country to draw new congressional district lines, the Supreme Court on Tuesday will hear two cases that could fundamentally impact how those maps are drawn.
Consulte Mais informação »
A familiar Supreme Court pattern as justices review extreme partisan gerrymanderingLiberal justices think it is a threat, and conservatives wonder whether courts have a role in policing it.
Consulte Mais informação »
Supreme Court to Deliberate Fate of Partisan Gerrymandering—AgainA case of North Carolina’s district lines drawn by Republicans, along with a case from Maryland where Democratic map makers have been under fire, finally could prompt the justices either to impose nationwide limits on partisan redistricting—or remove the federal courts entirely as a referee.
Consulte Mais informação »
Supreme Court to hear gerrymandering cases against Democrats, RepublicansWhen state legislatures draw the boundary lines for voting districts, the majority party typically comes up with a map designed to keep itself in power. But can that become so blatantly political that it violates the Constitution?
Consulte Mais informação »