Court strikes down North Carolina congressional map as unconstitutional

The Hill ^ | 08/27/18 | Lydia Wheeler

[yesthatjallen]

It will be ordered to be re-drawn until it favors Democrats.

Then it will be pronounced fair.

[DIRTYSECRET]

Congressman Watts district was fair?

[Robert A Cook PE]

Damn close now to the Nov election.

[Lysandru]

When I first read about this, I wondered, “just how much gerrymandering is Constitutional?” Surely no one expects a governing party to draw districts that work against them. I am genuinely curious as to what standards (if any) are being applied. And no, ‘pissing off Liberals’ is not even close to an objective and repeatable standard. We can’t let the minority party have a heckler’s veto.

[Luke21]

These partisan courts should be abolished. They are more powerful than the other two branches. It’s time to ignore them. They only rule one way.

[TBP]

Activist judges will make sure all eh districts are Democrat. Thi si show they plan to take the House.

[flamberge]

It is only allowed when the Democrats do it.

[shanover]

There is no such thing as a Constitution anymore.

[Governor Dinwiddie]

I thought earlier this year Democrats gerrymandered Pennsylvania and the court ruled "no problemo, amigo. Okie doakie!"

So Democrat gerrymandering Pennsylvania is good. Republicans gerrymandering North Carolina is bad. Heads I win, tales you lose.

And I'd like to give a shout out to the "conservative" Supreme court for their "profiles in courage" by punting for the umpteenth time. What a game plan—NOT.
 

[Blood of Tyrants]

How is it unconstitutional when Republicans do it but not when DemocRats do it?

[mtrott]

“Wynn said legislative defendants drew a plan designed to subordinate the interests of non-Republican voters not because they believe doing so advances any democratic, constitutional, or public interest, but because, as the chief legislative map drawer openly acknowledged, the General Assembly’s Republican majority “thinks electing Republicans is better than electing Democrats.”

Duh, what do you expect? Of course, Republicans think electing Republicans is better than Dems. And I have a hard time believing these judges would be so concerned if the shoe were on the other foot and the Dems were doing the gerrymandering.

[UCANSEE2]

Of course, we all know that before these nasty republicans tried to redraw the voting district maps, no one had ever done this before.

Matter of fact, the term 'gerrymandering' was created just a few months ago to give a proper label to this tactic.

All other voting districts are 'completely fair and unpolitical'.

[Be Free]

"In writing the majority opinion, which Judge William Earl Britt joined, Judge James Wynn said partisan gerrymanders “raise the specter that the Government may effectively drive certain ideas or viewpoints from the marketplace” because they “intentionally seek to entrench a favored party in power and make it difficult – if not impossible – for candidates of parties supporting disfavored viewpoints to prevail.”

“That is precisely what the Republican-controlled North Carolina General Assembly sought to do here,” he said."

Even if true, so what? To the victors go the spoils - its the way the system works. It was the Dems that drew the obscene districts that the Repubs changed - but then it was OK?

“But that is not a choice the Constitution allows legislative map drawers to make,” he said. “Rather, ‘those who govern should be the last people to help decide who should govern.’”

I must've missed the referenced section of the Constitution. In fact, I seem to recall something about a 10th Amendment? You know: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

There is literally NOTHING in the drawing of the districts that is against the Constitution of the US or NC. These activist judges that govern from the bench are one of the greatest threats to our Republic. They rule with impunity because there is no accountability.

[yesthatjallen]

After the so-called, Civil Rights era, Democrats gerrymandered to create minority-majority districts in order to elect black representatives.

They created their own ghetto districts and now they claim minority districts were forced on them.

You can't win with Democrats. When they lose by their own rules they claim the rules are unfair.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

There are actually computer programs that can draw the most compact set of districts based solely on where people live without any regard to their race or political persuasion or anything else, simply upon where people live.

This would be the most honest, unbiased way to do it, so we know it will never happen.

[Rebelbase]

Watts' district was a sham and should be the picture next to Gerrymandered District in the dictionary.

[Sgt_Schultze]

Partisan gerrymandering is required by the Constitution. Since unbiased lines drawn have been decreed to discriminate against minority voters, courts have demanded districts be drawn to enable minorities to be elected.

[yesthatjallen]

See #14

[centurion316]

Establishing and crafting political subdivisions is an inherent political act and has always been in the province of politicians. It cannot be otherwise. When judges get involved, the responsibility and power to devise congressional districts passes to persons that are not elected: judges, special masters, “non-partisan” panels. The result is invariably a construction that does not represent the will of the people. Rather, you get the will of the elites and these days they are always Democrats.

[Dilbert San Diego]

With today’s computer technology, that’s exactly what should be done. If that happened, there would still be some areas which would lean to one party or the other. But if computer generated, then nobody could complain that a partisan human being drew the district lines.