Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

appalachiablue

(41,131 posts)
Fri Jun 28, 2019, 03:25 PM Jun 2019

'The Supreme Court's Gerrymandering Ruling Is A Doomsday Scenario For Voting Rights'

'The Supreme Court’s Gerrymandering Ruling Is a Doomsday Scenario for Voting Rights.' The court found that partisan gerrymandering can’t be blocked by the judiciary, even in extreme cases. Ari Berman, Pema Levy, Mother Jones, 6/28/19.

The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that partisan gerrymandering cannot be challenged in federal court. The decision is a devastating blow to voters in gerrymandered districts, as well as the voting rights advocates who have been working for years to rein in extreme gerrymandering that benefits one party. But the court’s conservative majority, in a 5-4 opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, found Thursday that drawing maps to help one party remain in power presents “political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts.”

The ruling addressed challenges to partisan gerrymandering in Maryland and North Carolina. In both cases, the party in power drew districts to disadvantage its political opponents. In Maryland, Democrats dismantled a Republican-held congressional seat to gain a 7-1 advantage in Congress, while in North Carolina, Republicans drew a map that gave them a 9-3 advantage in the congressional delegation. (The North Carolina map was drawn by Thomas Hofeller, the GOP’s longtime redistricting mastermind who was also behind the Trump administration’s addition of a citizenship question on the 2020 census.)

Now, both maps will be left in place. Going forward, parties in power in state legislatures across the country will be given free rein by federal judges to entrench their own power through political map-drawing.

The ruling comes at a pivotal time: The 2020 elections will determine who controls the state legislative bodies that in most states will draw new district lines in 2021, following the 2020 census. These cases were the last chance for the Supreme Court to curb partisan gerrymandering before the next election. By ruling that partisan gerrymandering is beyond the reach of the courts, Thursday’s decision virtually ensures that the maps passed in 2021 will be even more extreme than in 2010.

It was the latest blow to voting rights from a Supreme Court that has gutted the Voting Rights Act (in an opinion by Roberts) and upheld strict voter ID laws, voter purging, and racial gerrymandering. “In giving such gerrymanders a pass from judicial review, the majority goes tragically wrong,” Justice Elana Kagan wrote in a dissent. “Election day—next year, and two years later, and two years after that—is what links the people to their representatives, and gives the people their sovereign power. That day is the foundation of democratic governance. And partisan gerrymandering can make it meaningless. At its most extreme—as in North Carolina and Maryland—the practice amounts to ‘rigging elections.’”...con't.

MORE, https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/06/the-supreme-courts-gerrymandering-ruling-is-a-doomsday-scenario-for-voting-rights/

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
'The Supreme Court's Gerrymandering Ruling Is A Doomsday Scenario For Voting Rights' (Original Post) appalachiablue Jun 2019 OP
The lasting impact of Jill Stein, BernieBros, and all of those who lapfog_1 Jun 2019 #1
good luck with that appalachiablue Jun 2019 #4
just a fact lapfog_1 Jun 2019 #6
Next thing will be: you must at least make $500,000 a year, be white, be male, and Doreen Jun 2019 #2
I haven't seen another post here about this major decision appalachiablue Jun 2019 #3
So if a state supreme court rules against it. bullimiami Jun 2019 #5
Thank you for posting this. murielm99 Jun 2019 #7
Yes. Igel Jun 2019 #8
It seems like this ruling preempts any appeal to the federal court system. bullimiami Jul 2019 #9

lapfog_1

(29,204 posts)
6. just a fact
Fri Jun 28, 2019, 04:57 PM
Jun 2019

you flip all of the Jill votes to Hillary and Trump is not President and TWO of the nine SCOTUS members would not be there.

voting rights, gerrymandering, abortion rights... and if the cheetolini decides that Democrats stole 2020 and, therefore he isnt going to step down...

Doreen

(11,686 posts)
2. Next thing will be: you must at least make $500,000 a year, be white, be male, and
Fri Jun 28, 2019, 03:46 PM
Jun 2019

then finally far right Christian fundamentalists.

appalachiablue

(41,131 posts)
3. I haven't seen another post here about this major decision
Fri Jun 28, 2019, 03:54 PM
Jun 2019

Last edited Fri Jun 28, 2019, 04:27 PM - Edit history (1)

from yesterday, could be due to the debate coverage. We know the requirements of being male and white weren't that long ago; plenty think we could be moving back to not only that era but also a time of states rights doctrine. The census question about immigration also came through yesterday. Both too late for debate questions last night presumably.

bullimiami

(13,094 posts)
5. So if a state supreme court rules against it.
Fri Jun 28, 2019, 04:18 PM
Jun 2019

does that mean this scotus ruled they can have no involvement?

and didn't the nc state courts rule against the gerrymander before it was taken federal?

what's to keep anyone from taking this ruling back to the state courts?

murielm99

(30,740 posts)
7. Thank you for posting this.
Fri Jun 28, 2019, 05:01 PM
Jun 2019

I think you are correct. We need to get busy instead of wringing our hands. There is a lot of work to be done to take back state governments and state courts.

Igel

(35,305 posts)
8. Yes.
Fri Jun 28, 2019, 07:45 PM
Jun 2019

In fact, that's exactly what's happened in the last year with a gerrymandering case in which the state court said it was impermissible. SCOTUS passed.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»'The Supreme Court's Gerr...