General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDemocrats Are Poised to Wipe Out Republicans' North Carolina Gerrymander In Time for 2020
Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court is unlikely to strike down partisan gerrymanders following Justice Anthony Kennedys retirement. But the plaintiffs did not file their lawsuit in federal court. Instead, they filed in state court, alleging a violation not of the federal Constitution, but of the North Carolina Constitution. They have a very strong case. The North Carolina Constitutions Equal Protection Clause is more robust than its federal counterpart, guaranteeing citizens substantially equal voting power and the right to vote on equal terms. It also commands that [a]ll elections shall be freethat is, not manipulated by the state to predetermine the outcome. And it safeguards freedom of speech and assembly beyond what the First Amendment provides.
All these constitutional rights, the plaintiffs argue, should prohibit the legislature from engaging in such egregious partisan gerrymandering. The practice dilutes the power of Democratic votes, stripping voters of their right to vote on equal terms. It prevents elections from being truly free by rigging the outcome in favor of the ruling party, as the Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently ruled in a similar case. And it infringes upon voters freedom of expression by discriminating against those who associate with a certain political party. In fact, Republican mapmakers retaliated against Democratic voters on the basis of political affiliation, unlawfully burdening their associational rights enshrined in the state constitution.
The plaintiffs stand an excellent chance of winning. This case will ultimately be decided by the North Carolina Supreme Courtand the judiciary is the one branch of government largely uncorrupted by GOP chicanery. In 2016, Democrat Michael R. Morgan won a seat on the court, creating a 43 majority. Republicans responded by attempting to rig the 2018 election in favor of a Republican incumbent, Justice Barbara Jackson. They abolished judicial primaries, hoping that multiple Democrats would run against Jackson, splitting the liberal vote. Instead, a lawyer named Chris Anglin ran as a Republican, creating a three-way race between Jackson, Anglin, and the Democratic candidate, civil rights attorney Anita Earls. Republicans tried and failed to knock Anglin off the ballot. And on Election Day, Anglin and Jackson split the GOP vote, handing the election to Earls.
As a result, Democrats will soon hold a 52 majority on the court. And Earls played a major role challenging earlier GOP gerrymanders. When she announced her candidacy, Earls declared that she sought to shield the right of all citizens to cast a ballot that is counted equally, a clear reference to partisan gerrymandering. There is no reason to doubt that she and her Democratic colleagues on the court will be prepared to invalidate the current legislative maps when this case reaches their docket.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/north-carolina-gerrymandering-lawsuit-anita-earls.html?__twitter_impression=true
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,447 posts)What's gonna happen when people get addicted to this democracy craze?
ProudMNDemocrat
(16,794 posts)ole Bobby Zimmerman of Hibbing, Minnesota wrote some 50 plus years ago....."The times, they are a changing."
griloco
(832 posts)octoberlib
(14,971 posts)And the GOP was hell bent on revenge. First order of business is to get rid of partisan gerrymandering.
Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)Only when our blue held states retaliate by completely disenfranchising their voters will action be taken. I say if the courts uphold it, Gerrymander the fuck out of the states we hold.
TwistOneUp
(1,020 posts)The Grifters and Oligarchs Party are fundagelicals - they'll understand this.
DeminPennswoods
(15,290 posts)When PA got its new map, the state GOP went to federal court 3 times and were rebuffed each time. That also included the US Supreme Court declining to get involved because the suit was brought at the state level and decided there. The Supreme Court justice who turned the PA Rs down was Sam Alito.
Our lawsuit was also based on our state constitution that mandates compact districts that do not divide cities, towns or municipalities. I hope this ruling is also applied when the state house districts, that also heavily gerry-mandered, are redrawn after the 2020 Census.
octoberlib
(14,971 posts)NewJeffCT
(56,829 posts)This could change the state for the US house as well - it's 10-3 Republican now. Ungerrymandered, it could be 7-6 either way, so a pickup of 3 or 4 seats just through fairness.
Jersey Devil
(9,875 posts)that were contested (12 of 13) in the 2018 election. No matter what the final number, it would have to be more than 25%.
ellie
(6,929 posts)are really terrible people. Just awful.