Posted on 10/10/2017 2:54:49 PM PDT by iowamark
I am sorry. The source publication is The Hill.
So vote the change, don't go begging on your knees for mercy from the kings and queens of the court.
The first US gerrymander was by Patrick Henry to keep James Madison out of the House of Representatives.
That’s a pedigree few political acts can match!
(It failed BTW).
Any limits would have to be very lenient.
“If the Supreme Court limits the most extreme partisan gerrymandering, it will be a powerful step in the direction of restoring trust, and ensures the promise of America that Abraham Lincoln reminded the citizenry of at Gettysburg, government of the people, by the people, for the people.”
UTTER BS. It will be another step towards a supreme judicial rule. Instead we should return to a true electoral vote for president and appointment of senators by the states.
I wonder how the CBC (Congressional Black Caucus) feels about the potential defenestration of their ranks if the US Supreme Court rules against ‘extreme’ gerrymandering?
That's what puzzles me about this whole thing. I thought the Civil Rights Act guaranteed some "black" districts which led to ridiculous gerrymandering to create them.
See my simple paragraph below to explain it.
Gerrymandering to make a black district is good .
Gerrymandering to make a Hispanic district is good
Gerrymandering to elect a democrat is good.
GERRYMANDERING TO ELECT A CONSERVATIVE IS BAD BAD BAD AND WORSE.
—you’ve got it —it’s reprehensible when done by Repubs but okay when the Democraps do it-—
My thought on the headline was “Right, the USSC not only allowed gerrymandering, but demanded it.”
Of course the point of gerrymandering is to make it so you CAN’T vote the change. Also both parties love the system as is, making it even tougher to vote any change.
Gerrymandering sucks!!! Unless it benefits a democrat. Call me skeptical of the motives here. The Dems knownthey have utterly lost rural America and desperately want to turn us into a nation ruled by costal city states.
Several of those are Voting Rights Act districts designed to specifically elect Blacks or Hispanics. If they were to be diluted, they risk the GOP districts that often surround them.
Bingo.
And, the Barney Frank district became weird during his time in office (to protect him). MA lost a seat or two during that time.
for nearly 100 years Democrats gerrymandered to maintain power... but now that Republicans are in charge... things MUST change.
BS
leave it alone for the next 90+ years to equal things out!
Democrats are just angry they ignored the state elections, got BTFO, and now are powerless to stop redistricting from retrenching the GOP’s majority.
They focused too much on illegals tipping the demographics and that cities are all you need to win.
More rearranging of deckchairs on a sinking ship. So they’ll limit gerrymandering to make elections more competitive amongst uniparty candidates.
Rah.
There used to be (still is?) one in Florida that narrowed down to the width of railroad tracks, then opened up to pick up individual houses.
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.