[Army Air Corps]

Ping.

[kindred]

Judges have no right to steal power from the Congress, whether state or federal. Judicial abuse is increasing and had better be squelched , such abuse of power by power grabbing judges is not to be tolerated.
And states need to stand up together and rebuke the DC power mad dictator obama and all his evil allies in the congress.
We don't need no stinking DC regulators dictating unconstitutional laws and stealing states monies for useless and worthless thieves in America.

[winkadink]

Too bad the Census counts the illegal aliens living in our Country.

[Sudetenland]

The age old argument. Are laws different for minorities than they are for whites? Is the Constitution worded differently for minorities than for whites? Why should there be special set aside districts for minorities? It's unconstitutional (Equal Protection) to draw special district lines specifically to create minority districts.

Of course, I know what the Constitution says is immaterial these days. I know that "equal protection" really means unequal protection, but I do like to exercise my increasingly limited right to free speech now and then to pose these questions.

[BuckeyeTexan]

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.

[MestaMachine]

Good on Texas!!!

[Don Corleone]

Sort of like the maps in Arizona that were 2 houses wide and snaked across the state for 300 miles. Hah! BTW we still don’t have representation here in Tucson although that’s possibly not all bad considering Giffords voting record. Taxation w/o representation? I guess its ok.

[hocndoc]

Somebody remembered that the Constitutions (of Texas and the US) don’t say that judges get the important decisions and the Legislatures get the unimportant ones. I do wish the SCOTUS had said “hands off,” but this is better than nothing.

The only “minority” the map San Antonio Federal District judges favored was the minority Party, the Dems. They actually created a brand new District!

Our Republican Legislators include “minorities.” The judges ignored that all minorities turned more toward the Republicans in 2010.

[zeugma]

You'll find the text of the opinion here(PDF).

Justice Thomas had a concurring opinion. Here's the opening paragraph of that...

The Court proceeds from the premise that court-drawn interim plans are necessary in part because Texas’ newly enacted redistricting plans are unenforceable for lack of preclearance under §5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Ante, at 1–3. In my view, Texas’ failure to timely obtain §5 preclearance of its new plans is no obstacle to their implementation, because, as I have previously explained, §5 is unconstitutional. See Northwest Austin Municipal Util. Dist. No. One v. Holder, 557 U. S. 193, 212 (2009) (THOMAS, J., concurring in judgment in part and dissent- ing in part). ...

[Liberty Valance]

bttt

[Arrowhead1952]

Just in case you missed this ping.