Law [Partisan Gerrymandering News] Florida appeals court reverses ruling on DeSantis’s congressional maps

Arkain2K

Arkain2K

Si vis pacem, para bellum
@Steel
Joined
Dec 6, 2010
Messages
33,422
Reaction score
5,683
Thread Index:

Will the Supreme Court strike down extreme partisan gerrymandering?
Thomas P. Wolf and Michael C. Li
750x422
​

The U.S. Supreme Court this fall will hear a series of blockbuster cases dealing with core constitutional rights and basic national values. Among the most important is Gill vs. Whitford, a Wisconsin case that asks the justices to address the toxic threat of partisan gerrymandering. With Whitford, Americans — who by wide margins say they are fed up with gerrymandering — may finally get the breakthrough they have long sought.

To start, the Wisconsin voters who brought the case aren’t asking the court to rule on everything that’s problematic about the ways our districts are created and our legislatures operate. They simply want the court to determine if Wisconsin’s General Assembly map — a textbook example of extreme gerrymandering — is beyond the constitutional pale. (Of course, a ruling against Wisconsin would have ramifications for extreme gerrymanders elsewhere in the country.)

When the court considers Wisconsin’s extreme map, two facts should help soothe twin concerns that it expressed when it last addressed the constitutionality of partisan gerrymandering in the mid-2000s: that unconstitutional gerrymanders are too hard to separate from run-of-the-mill, legal ones and that a ruling by the court banning certain kinds of gerrymanders might lead to a flood of redistricting litigation.

For now, Wisconsin-type extreme gerrymandering is likely limited to a handful of congressional maps and less than a dozen state legislative maps. And its harm — the decade-long entrenchment of a single party — is a particularly stark one, both because it is so flagrant and because it so clearly violates core American commitments to representative and accountable legislatures.

New developments in social science should also help the court feel more comfortable with policing extreme gerrymanders. Since the mid-2000s, many novel methods have emerged to reliably flag maps that are biased in favor of one party. These methods include both measures of “partisan symmetry” (which show when a map favors one party over another in translating votes into seats) and simulated mapping applications (which show when maps are biased at a level that could only be intentional). Many of the worst maps, including Wisconsin’s, violate multiple such methods, making them easy cases.

Current and former elected officials from both parties — including Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), former Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, Republican Ohio Gov. John Kasich, and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) — have joined together to demand a judicial response to the problem. This bipartisan chorus demonstrates that the Wisconsin case isn’t about which party wins. Instead, it’s about whether voters will get representative and accountable legislatures.

These calls are being echoed by legions of political scientists, law professors, historians, legal advocates, civil rights organizations and civil society groups. Their expertise and experience tell them the same thing that elected officials have learned from their time in office: Partisan gerrymandering has reached an intolerable limit, by any measure and any framework.

Maps are only going to get more extreme if gerrymandering isn’t curbed now. During the 2010 cycle, crafty mapmakers used extensive voter data and powerful mapping programs to expertly pack voters and entrench their parties. Since then, computers have only gotten faster, voter data richer, and mapping programs more sophisticated. These developments threaten to make precise, pernicious gerrymandering easier than ever.

With the next round of redistricting coming in 2021, relief from the Supreme Court couldn’t come soon enough.
Click to expand...

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-wolf-li-gerrymander-20170925-story.html
 
Last edited:
This should be interesting. I'm surprised a different group wasn't originally selected to do this. It isn't surprising it happens at all.
 
What's the criteria for drawing up districts? Is it completely at the states' discretion?
 
Liquid Smoke said:
Thanks for replying but you didn't really answer the question.
Click to expand...
Sure I did. Whatever answer I give ends in the next question which is why republicans are so good at it and I'm answering that question
 
Liquid Smoke said:
What's the criteria for drawing up districts? Is it completely at the states' discretion?
Click to expand...

Yes, and more specifically the parties that control the states.

This whole issue has become cartoonish. Lawmakers should be ashamed of what they have done to this country with their team sport BS.
 
Arkain2K said:
Thhe U.S. Supreme Court this fall will hear a series of blockbuster cases dealing with core constitutional rights and basic national values. Among the most important is Gill vs. Whitford, a Wisconsin case that asks the justices to address the toxic threat of partisan gerrymandering. With Whitford, Americans — who by wide margins say they are fed up with gerrymandering — may finally get the breakthrough they have long sought.

To start, the Wisconsin voters who brought the case aren’t asking the court to rule on everything that’s problematic about the ways our districts are created and our legislatures operate. They simply want the court to determine if Wisconsin’s General Assembly map — a textbook example of extreme gerrymandering — is beyond the constitutional pale. (Of course, a ruling against Wisconsin would have ramifications for extreme gerrymanders elsewhere in the country.)

Current and former elected officials from both parties — including Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), former Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, Republican Ohio Gov. John Kasich, and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) — have joined together to demand a judicial response to the problem. This bipartisan chorus demonstrates that the Wisconsin case isn’t about which party wins. Instead, it’s about whether voters will get representative and accountable legislatures.

These calls are being echoed by legions of political scientists, law professors, historians, legal advocates, civil rights organizations and civil society groups. Their expertise and experience tell them the same thing that elected officials have learned from their time in office: Partisan gerrymandering has reached an intolerable limit, by any measure and any framework.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-wolf-li-gerrymander-20170925-story.html
Click to expand...

I have to say, that while I am glad that the SC is taking up this issue, when I see that list of politicians names, I think firing squad, not integrity, and my tin-foil gets to tingling.
 
VivaRevolution said:
Yes, and more specifically the parties that control the states.

This whole issue has become cartoonish. Lawmakers should be ashamed of what they have done to this country with their team sport BS.
Click to expand...
Winning is all that matters. Shame is irrelevant when your grip on power allows for the complete dismissal of popular opinion.
 
My question is how they will establish, mathematically and geographically, what constitutes unconstitutional gerrymandering. That seems like a difficult thing for the courts to nail down. Could this be the first court opinion with a square root symbol in it? Plus, there's just no fucking way this court will stop Republicans from rigging districts.

And Republicans shouldn't be championing gerrymandering just because it is temporarily giving them an unfair advantage to enjoy, because eventually their little Frankenstein will turn on them in the form of radical populism or a Democrat takeover.
 
Fawlty said:
My question is how they will establish, mathematically and geographically, what constitutes unconstitutional gerrymandering. That seems like a difficult thing for the courts to nail down. Could this be the first court opinion with a square root symbol in it? Plus, there's just no fucking way this court will stop Republicans from rigging districts.

And Republicans shouldn't be championing gerrymandering just because it is temporarily giving them an unfair advantage to enjoy, because eventually their little Frankenstein will turn on them in the form of radical populism or a Democrat takeover.
Click to expand...
Losing out some in the long run isn't really a wrench in the gears imo. The goal is major dismantlement of social programs while funneling that money upward to private entities; guaranteed tax payer checks focused toward the very wealthy. It's worth it to make such a monumental score even if the political tide turns a bit down the road. And if you have an institutionalized majority, the damage is mitigated barring a blow out during the once-every-10-years moment of vulnerability.
 
Limbo Pete said:
Losing out some in the long run isn't really a wrench in the gears imo. The goal is major dismantlement of social programs while funneling that money upward to private entities; guaranteed tax payer checks focused toward the very wealthy. It's worth it to make such a monumental score even if the political tide turns a bit down the road. And if you have an institutionalized majority, the damage is mitigated barring a blow out during the once-every-10-years moment of vulnerability.
Click to expand...
In that case they're moral free riders on the good will of Democrats (who are very unlikely to gerrymander to such a degree), which is really sickening. And the populism on the right could do a ton of damage itself, without any help from the left- arguably that's what's happening right now. God help them if the Bernie/populist left ever gets in control. That's a cold dish.
 
cincymma79 said:
Yeah but nobody gave a shit until they won this election
Click to expand...
Nonsense. Gerrymandering has been an issue for years. It was predicted that gerrymandering would cause populist or extremist candidates to flourish, and to some degree that has indeed happened.
 
Fawlty said:
Nonsense. Gerrymandering has been an issue for years. It was predicted that gerrymandering would cause populist or extremist candidates to flourish, and to some degree that has indeed happened.
Click to expand...
Sham we check your post history and see the last time you complained
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Darkgsp
Elections In a narrow 4-3 decision, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has mandated the creation of new state legislative maps.
Replies
4
Views
415
BFoe
BFoe

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,596
Messages
55,429,556
Members
174,775
Latest member
shawn_bogart

Share this page

Back
Top