Posted on 06/27/2019 6:59:04 AM PDT by SMGFan
Live blog of opinions | June 27, 2019 Live
We're live-blogging as the Supreme Court releases its final opinions of the term.
SCOTUSblog is sponsored by Casetext: A more intelligent way to search the law.
The court holds that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts.
The court’s ruling means that courts will not have a role to play in reviewing partisan gerrymandering claims.
Gorsuch and Breyer have both been switching sides a lot this term.
It is 5-4. Kagan dissents, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor.
It is 5-4. Kagan dissents, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor.
A non-politicized SCOTUS would rule 9-0 in favor of adding the citizenship question to the census. It will be a good litmus test for the so-called conservatives on the court. What will Roberts do? Kavanaugh?
The court holds that none of the proposed “tests” for evaluating partisan gerrymandering claims meets the need for a limited and precise standard that is judicially discernible and manageable — e.g., there’s not a good test to use to decide them.
Toward the end of the opinion, Roberts acknowledges that “excessive partisanship in districting leads to results that reasonably seem unjust.” But that does not mean, he says, that “the solution lies with the federal judiciary. We conclude that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts.”
Has anyone actually seen Ginsberg?
The jig is up once someone puts a hand through Ginsburg
Proper decision. The states have rights under Federalism.
Bump.
Yes!
with all the court observers. If she were not there it would be news.
By ANY means.
My lawyer friend in DC told me rumors were swirling about Breyer.
Justice Kagan is now reading from her dissent in the case, so we could be here for a while before the next opinion is released.
Justice Kagan’s closing paragraph: “Of all times to abandon the Court’s duty to declare the law, this was not the one. The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government. Part of the Court’s role in that system is to defend its foundations. None is more important than free and fair elections. With respect but deep sadness, I dissent. “
the census opinion will be everywhere.
Kagan: “Of all times to abandon the Court’s duty to declare the law, this was not the one. The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government. Part of the Court’s role in that system is to defend its foundations. None is more important than free and fair elections. With respect but deep sadness, I dissent. “
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.