Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor just sent a big signal that partisan gerrymandering is going down

[babylonsister]

https://thinkprogress.org/ginsburg-sotomayor-signal-partisan-gerrymandering-f24d049cdab4/

Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor just sent a big signal that partisan gerrymandering is going down
House members may soon have to compete in democratic elections again.
Ian Millhiser
Feb 6, 2018, 3:17 pm


The Supreme Court handed down a fairly routine scheduling order on Tuesday that, at least on the surface, looks like like dozens of brief and uninteresting orders handed down by the Court every year. This order, however, contains a big hint about what may be the most important case of the current Supreme Court term.

It suggests that partisan gerrymandering is about to be declared unconstitutional.

The case in question, Rucho v. Common Cause, centers on congressional maps in North Carolina. Last January, a panel of three federal judges struck down North Carolina’s maps as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. Republican leaders in North Carolina requested a stay of this decision from the Supreme Court a few days later, which the Court granted.

Shortly after the Court granted this stay, the plaintiffs in the case filed a motion asking the Supreme Court to place Rucho on its argument calendar and “establish an expedited schedule for merits briefing and oral argument.” Had the Court granted this motion, it would have potentially allowed the justices to decide Rucho quickly enough that, if the Court ultimately decided that North Carolina’s maps are unconstitutional, new maps could be drawn in time for this November’s election.

Unfortunately for opponents of gerrymandering, the order handed down by the Supreme Court on Tuesday denied this request to expedite the case. As a practical matter, this means that the case is likely to be heard next term — too late to prevent North Carolina’s gerrymandered maps from being used in the 2018 midterms.

What’s especially interesting about Tuesday’s order, however, is that Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor both dissented. They would have granted the request to hold an expedited hearing in Rucho.

There’s no way to be certain why exactly Ginsburg and Sotomayor disagreed with their colleagues — but the most likely explanation is that, despite this temporary setback in Rucho, the Court is about to hand down very good news to opponents of partisan gerrymandering.

more...

https://thinkprogress.org/ginsburg-sotomayor-signal-partisan-gerrymandering-f24d049cdab4/

[Proud Liberal Dem]

1. Good if so

I hope that SCOTUS comes down against voter roll purges out of Ohio too!

[dragonlady]

2. The article goes on to guess that they know plaintiffs will win the Wisconsin gerrymander case

It was argued at the beginning of the term in October. Many in Wisconsin are waiting anxiously for some good news about this one.

[malthaussen]

3. I'm not convinced.

The first question that occurs is whether the NC and Wisconsin gerrymander cases turn on similar points of law. The USSC refused to hear the PA case because it turned on a matter of the State constitution, which is outside the USSC's purview. This obviously does not apply in the NC and Wisconsin cases, since the Court is willing to hear them.

But it could be argued that the Court's refusal to hear the PA case signals a desire on the part of the Court not to interfere in issues of State districting if at all possible. If this were the case, then they may not call for a Wisconsin re-districting. And if the Wisconsin and NC cases differ significantly in law, Justices Ginsberg and Sotomayor might want to expedite the NC case in hopes that it differs sufficiently to result in a different decision.

-- Mal