One Of The Most Aggressive Gerrymanders In The Country Just Lost In The Supreme Court

[applegrove]

One Of The Most Aggressive Gerrymanders In The Country Just Lost In The Supreme Court

by Ian Millhiser at Think Progress

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/05/23/3780855/one-aggressive-gerrymanders-country-just-lost-supreme-court/

"SNIP...............


Nearly two years ago, a federal court struck down Virginia’s congressional maps, finding that state lawmakers engaged in an unconstitutional racial gerrymander when they packed tens of thousands of African-American voters into the already strongly Democratic district represented by Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) — thus effectively diluting the impact of black voters in the state. In 2012, the year of the last presidential race, the state’s gerrymandered maps allowed Republicans to capture 8 of the state’s 11 congressional seats, despite the fact that President Obama won the state by 3 points.

On Monday, the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal brought by three Republican members of Congress who hoped to maintain the old maps. Though the Court’s decision in Wittman v. Personhuballah expresses no view on the merits of the case, it effectively allows the lower court’s order to stand.

That’s good news for Democrats, but also probably not earth-shattering news. In January, the lower court drew new maps for the state that corrects the racial gerrymander in Scott’s district by redrawing that district and a few that surround it. The primary impact of these new maps will be felt in the state’s fourth congressional district, currently represented by Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA).

According to Forbes’ attorneys, this district will be “completely transform[ed] from a 48% Democratic district into a safe 60% Democratic district.” So that almost certainly means an additional Democratic member of Congress under the new maps.




...............SNIP"

[underthematrix]

1. Thank you SCOTUS and thank you lower Court

[forest444]

17. And thank you, Fat Tony Scaliar, for leaving this world when you did.

Best thing you ever did for your country, pal.

?w=300&h=213

[tazkcmo]

2. Sick of this crap.

Be it Democrats or Republicans doing this, I hate it. If one needs to cheat to win, one needs to do a serious reevaluation of one's self. Thank you for the article.

[MADem]

3. Rather unsubtle! Obvious gerrymander is obvious!

How nice that the Supremes went along with the lower court!!!

[3catwoman3]

4. My congressional...

...district, Illinois 6th, looks like a giant jagged letter C that a rodent has been chewing on.

[pscot]

8. Roskam is a sort of giant rodent

[3catwoman3]

10. Do you live in this...

...district too?

Apologies to rats - it is an insult to them to compare them to Roskam.

[pscot]

12. I used to live in McHenry

So I know the region pretty well.

[3catwoman3]

13. We have lived in...

...Algonquin for 22 years. We moved here from the Wash DC area. Quite the change in terms of diversity, or lack thereof, to be more accurate.

[pscot]

18. We used to eat at Simonini's

once in a while. I live in the Northwest now. Haven't been back to Illinois in a very long time.

[procon]

5. This should be a national law, not piecemeal, district by district, state by state. nt

[Sunlei]

6. Good point, should be a National Law.Republicans take advantage of slow courts, gerrymander for yrs.

[RoccoRyg]

7. I learned in political science class...

That there's two forms of gerrymandering, cracking and packing. Cracking it when you split the voters into separate districts dominated by other types of voters, thus diluting their votes. Packing is when you fit as many of one kind of voter into one district as you can, ensuring the district will go to your party every time. The Supreme Court sometimes throws out maps that show a lot of cracking, but in the past they were more tolerant of packing. It makes you wonder if creating a truly fair district is really possible.

[ancianita]

9. Why wouldn't this be a guiding ruling for other gerrymandering cases up and down the

judicial circuits' dockets? And thus support all other court re-drawn maps?

If it's a pretty important ruling for other pending cases, it seems pretty important for the General Election, imo.

[wildeyed]

20. Because they didn't issue a ruling, just dismissed the case and allowed

the lower court ruling to stand. Even if they did issue a ruling, it would not be considered precedent because they are one justice short. But it is still VERY good news.

[ancianita]

21. I see. Thank you.

[TeamPooka]

11. 1 down. 375 rigged districts to fix.

[scottie55]

14. Screwing Democrats Out Of Their Vote ---> It's How They Roll

Absolute Bullshit.

Have a computer draw the maps.

[happyslug]

15. Duplicate subject matter from yesterday.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141461578

If you had gone to that thread, you would have found out the issue was one of STANDING not the merits. The Attorney General of Virginia had REFUSED to file the appeal, and the Supreme Court ruled no one else had standing to continue the case thus dismissed the case.

[sunnystarr]

22. Yes it only righted one wrong

It is unlikely, however, that this decision will do much to deter future gerrymanders. The state drew unconstitutionally gerrymandered maps, and yet it still got to run two entire elections under those maps. If it takes courts this long to respond to illegal gerrymanders, lawmakers still have a strong incentive to keep drawing unconstitutional maps.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/05/23/3780855/one-aggressive-gerrymanders-country-just-lost-supreme-court/

[tclambert]

16. I think Gerrymanders would be a good name for oddly shaped space alien invaders.

[wildeyed]

19. This is great news!