Federal Court upholds Texas Redistricting

FOXNEWS

[sinkspur]

Great News!!!!!

[HoustonCurmudgeon]

Yup and as I used to like to put it we had our conventions in a telephone booth!

I tell people that when I started in the party there was me, Tower, the Bush family, 6 curmudgeons, 3 reprobates, and two blue haired ladies in Midland! ;-)

[Gracey]

LOL. Yes, I agree.... :}

[deport]

Are you all talking about the Supreme Court???

---

Yes, but about the PA case not the TX case. They will appeal for sure. What I suspect the attorney was indicating regarding a ruling was whether they would accept the appeal or not.... It takes 5 to agree to accept it. I doubt they will as the PA case may well be the only one necessary.... just speculating...

[sinkspur]

I'm so sorry. The Martian has been quiet through this whole effort, as has been most of the minorities, since they've been strengthened by this redistricting plan.

But, it's got to be discouraging to have Lee as your rep.

[Trajan88]

The Hammer (aka Tom Delay) is rockin'.

Trajan88

[Trajan88]

Re: "Down in Texas, they will be firing up the barbeques and drinking long neck Lone Star."

Not a bad idea if I were at the Chicken in Aggieland; however, since I'm in Plano, Texas right now, I'm going to sip a little 12 year single malt Macallan.

See ya Dems... don't let the door knob hit ya in the backside on the way out.

Trajan88; TAMU Class of '88

[Dog Gone]

The Supreme Court doesn't normally tell us when they are going to issue a ruling, although it has to be pretty quickly in the Jubilerer (Pennsylvania) case or the new map in Pennsylvania will be in effect for the next election.

It has to be this month, and the Supreme Court is well aware of the filing deadlines, etc.

The issue in that case is simply "when does partisan gerrymandering go too far?". That question has already been asked and answered in previous Supreme Court cases, but either the Supreme Court is prepared to clarify their previous rulings (and nobody is terribly thrilled with their previous opinions in this matter), or it was simply a case where the four libs on the bench wanted a crack at undoing the Pennsylvania redistricting.

That's because it only takes four justices to vote to hear an appeal.

If they heard Jubilerer because they want to rewrite the rules for redistricting, then all bets are off. It's possible that ALL states are in violation of the new tests they could announce.

The Supreme Court is unlikely to desire such a result. They are supposed to make rulings which end disputes, not throw the electoral process into chaos.

One thing to keep in mind is that while Sandra Day O'Connor is a swing vote on social issues and isn't a bedrock conservative by any means, her track record in supporting the Republican Party has been unwavering. On conservative issues, she sends a mixed message, but on partisan issues she's always been there in the past.

So I guess I'm predicting that the court, by a 5-4 margin, will clarify some rules which validate what was done in Pennsylvania and in Texas.

We'll find out very shortly.

[deport]

Too much misinformation floating at this time...... Hopefully things will settle down and accurate data will become available... Note the following from the article in post 159 DMN ......

Attorneys for the losing side could not be reached immediately after the ruling, but they are expected to appeal the case to the United States Supreme Court, which the law requires to accept the case for review.

And from the Chronicle in post #142

Democrats criticized the decision and promised an immediate appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Five of the court's nine justices would have to agree to hear the appeal to halt the plan's use in the 2004 elections.

[Liz]

Martin Frost is the Congressman that everyone was looking forward to being redistricted out. No one deserves ousting more than Frost.

The Texas Department of Public Safety investigated the theft of a Texas state employee's property that found its way from Texas into the hands of Martin Frost who produced it in Washington, DC.

On April 10, 2003, a folio containing Texas congressional redistricting maps were stolen from a committee room in the state capitol. The folio and its contents belonged to a Republican legislative aide, and therefore, was very valuable to Frost's reelection chances.

DPS had video footage of three men, including one identified as Frost senior aide Gerry Hebert, apparently leaving the committee room with the stolen maps.

Shortly after the theft, Rep. Frost produced one of the purloined maps to news reporters in Washington, D.C.

DPS investigated the theft as a class B misdemeanor, punishable by up to a $2,000 fine and 180 days in jail. If the pilfered goods were transported from Texas to Washington, D.C., the crime would be a federal offense. Looks like Frost escapes the law but ousting him would be a penalty he richly deserves.

[WOSG]

Yes, It was 2 to 1. 3 to zip on several points where the Dems were grasping at straws, but 2 to 1 on the question of whether districts met the voting rights act.

I read the whole decision.

basically all 3 judges agree the lege had the right to redistrict. They all agreed that 'partisan gerrymandering' is legal, even if they dont like. They are referees.

The Democrat Judge though said that district 23 was impermissible. this is the district where they took bonilla's district and made it a bit more white and less hispanic so he could stay in. The Dem made a case that this was dilution. The State argument was that that latino representation was made up with district 15, so that total number of districts that are latino was still 7.
Good argument that 2 judges liked and 1 didnt.
The Dem Judge says that only 8% of Hispanics voted for Bonilla. yikes, actually that number shocks me - bush got a hispanic *majority* in 1998. what gives with that?

In any case, the judge would have then gone overboard
an ordered the old lines kept for the election (yikes!) rather than draw new lines and enjoined the lege to try again! that's killing a fly with a sledgehammer. Good thing it was 2-1 for the State!!

[Dog Gone]

My understanding is that there is an automatic review of the panel's decision, but it can simply be a paper review with no hearing or arguments. But I don't know where the Houston Chronicle came up with the idea that five justices would have to vote certiorari to hold a full hearing.

That's wrong. Four could do it. And I doubt it will happen.

[WOSG]

I heard judge Abbott speak on this question of a 'stay'.

Distinguish 2 things: Hearing the case, and getting a 'stay' of the current lines are 2 different things.
A stay that enjoins (stops) use of the new districts; and, 2, hearing an appeal of the case itself just means the USSC will hear the arguments and decide if the appeals court ruled correctly. The former wont happen, the latter will.

The danger from the latter is that the wording of the decision practically is inviting 'guidance' from the USSC on these matters. The USSC could hear the case and rule next year, after the 1374C lines are used in this election.

The Dems will ask for a stay, the State will argue against, and unless the USSC is off their gourd, no stay will be granted. This appeals ruling makes is a certainty that
these lines will be used, at least for the 2004 election.

Count on a good pickup of seats for GOP in the House.

[Dog Gone]

The Democrats must be melancholy with this ruling; however, they have a "Republican" ace in their hole: Sandra Day O'Connor.

Your predictable persistent pessimism makes you a nattering nabob of negativism.

[WOSG]

The issue in that case is simply "when does partisan gerrymandering go too far?". That question has already been asked and answered in previous Supreme Court cases, but either the Supreme Court is prepared to clarify their previous rulings (and nobody is terribly thrilled with their previous opinions in this matter), or it was simply a case where the four libs on the bench wanted a crack at undoing the Pennsylvania redistricting.

Well, here's to hoping they havent spiked OConnor's Martinis and gotten her to go wobbly again. Another big mess for Scalia to verbally clean up.... I worry about that USSC. You never know what they are going to do next.

[Dog Gone]

Yes, and that's why it's imperative that Bush be re-elected and the Senate prepare to go nuclear on the judicial confirmation process, if necessary.

Back in 2000, I was continually arguing here that the most important reason to elect Bush was because the philosophical balance of the Supreme Court for the next generation was in the balance. I think I'm still right, although the events of 9/11 overshadowed everyones' thoughts, and there's little doubt that the "Bush Doctrine" was every bit as critical to the future of the world. America would look far different and far worse today if Al Gore had been elected.

It's abundantly clear that Rhenquist is going to step down soon, and O'Connor may quickly join him. It's imperative that they both be replaced by conservatives, and that's no easy task. At best, the Democrats are willing to let us replace them with two new O'Connors, and they'd like to slip in a David Souter if we're asleep at the wheel again.

[hadaclueonce]

I agree, Ralph Hall was the last dixiecrat, had a D after his name, but an R when he voted on issues that he knew would keep him in congress. Just my observations.

[Clintonfatigued]

There is some additional news. The 'Rats and their auxillary groups are going to the U.S. Supreme Court seeking an injunction to stop the rediscticting.

[Clintonfatigued]

Sandra Day O'Conner didn't support Al Gore in 2000. That is a relevant precedent.

[Bigun]

I can't tell y'all how pleased I am with this.

Oh I can imagine! LOL!

In 1966 at 16 I started working with Republicans in Texas. At the time we had Senator Tower and a Congressman in the panhandle. Tower won reelection that year and George Bush won in the 7th Congressional district.

I didn't really get started until 10 years after that but we could still hold conventions in VERY small rooms! (Maybe 2 phone booths!)

My how things have changed .... now if we could only dump the rino element! ;-) Well we will work on that tomorrow ......

Amen and AMEN! The dims will be a VERY long time recovering from this and the RINOS are now TOP priority!

[basil]

Excellent news!