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
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Supreme Court refuses to stop new congressional maps in Pennsylvania [View all]DonViejo
(60,536 posts)20. Breaking: Supreme Court, With No Noted Dissent, Refuses to Intervene in Pa Redistricting Case...
Breaking: Supreme Court, With No Noted Dissent, Refuses to Intervene in Pa Redistricting Case Just Hours After Lower Court Rules
Posted on March 19, 2018 12:20 pm by Rick Hasen
I called this case a long shot for a long time, but the fact that there was no noted dissents is puzzling given the long delay. The claim was really a weak one and would have led to a huge number of lawsuits challenging state court cases striking down redistricting on state constitutional grounds. Here are some possibilities for the delay.
1, The Court was waiting for the lower court to rule, in case the lower court saw something worth pursing. Given that the interests were almost identical to this case, this does not make much sense, but for the timing.
2. A Justice decided to write, another Justice wrote a response, and the original Justice changed his or her mind. Who knows?
3. A Justice or more needed more time to consider the issues, and was pondering a dissent but then decided not to write.
###
http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98206
Posted on March 19, 2018 12:20 pm by Rick Hasen
Link to tweet
I called this case a long shot for a long time, but the fact that there was no noted dissents is puzzling given the long delay. The claim was really a weak one and would have led to a huge number of lawsuits challenging state court cases striking down redistricting on state constitutional grounds. Here are some possibilities for the delay.
1, The Court was waiting for the lower court to rule, in case the lower court saw something worth pursing. Given that the interests were almost identical to this case, this does not make much sense, but for the timing.
2. A Justice decided to write, another Justice wrote a response, and the original Justice changed his or her mind. Who knows?
3. A Justice or more needed more time to consider the issues, and was pondering a dissent but then decided not to write.
###
http://electionlawblog.org/?p=98206
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
64 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
![](du4img/smicon-reply-new.gif)
Supreme Court refuses to stop new congressional maps in Pennsylvania [View all]
BumRushDaShow
Mar 2018
OP
Breaking: Supreme Court, With No Noted Dissent, Refuses to Intervene in Pa Redistricting Case...
DonViejo
Mar 2018
#20
You don't have to apologize! I'm as surprised as you one of the wingnut Supremes didn't try and
DonViejo
Mar 2018
#34
Thank you all for your analyses and opinions. While IANAL (but am somewhat anal)
erronis
Mar 2018
#63
Twitters election experts are saying Dems could gain 3-6+ seats from PA alone in a blue tsunami.
LonePirate
Mar 2018
#18
Supreme Court, With No Noted Dissent, Refuses to Intervene in Pa Redistricting Case
Gothmog
Mar 2018
#22
Turzai: "by adding new requirements for drawing congressional districts".
BumRushDaShow
Mar 2018
#54