Posted on 06/17/2019 7:36:09 AM PDT by SMGFan
Supreme Court hands Virginia Democrats a win in gerrymandering case © Greg Nash The Supreme Court has ruled against the Virginia House of Delegates in a racial gerrymandering case that represents a victory for Democrats in the state.
In the 5-4 ruling, the justices found that the House didn't have the standing to appeal a lower court ruling that found that the new district maps must be used ahead of the 2020 election. Those new maps are already in use.
Democrats claimed that the districts were unlawful because they featured too many black voters, and diminished their power across the state and in other districts.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the majority opinion, and was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Neil Gorsuch.
Justices Samuel Alito, John Roberts, Stephen Breyer and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Only Democrats can gerrymander.
I would like to think that skin color wasn’t a factor for justice Thomas.
“odd mix of judges “
It sure is.
Waiting for the Kavanaugh and Robert haters to spin this one!
Make up your minds, Dems. Either Democrats want convoluted districts that guarantee a minority-majority district to ensure a minority representative gets elected, or they want minorities scattered throughout other districts where their influence is watered down and will end up being represented by a non-minority.
Guess they want it both ways, depending on how it benefits them on a case-by-case basis.
It certainly is an odd mix.
Oh, well, I guess I have to speed up plans to get out of here before the Democrats turn Virginia into Maryland.
55% Black districts?
I was not aware that Blacks makeup 55% of the VA population!
This is the worst sort of pandering, and SCOTUS should be ashamed of itself!
The proper way to decide voting districts is to use a race/gender/Party neutral computer program based solely on the population!
Gerrymandering is a high crime!
Democrats claimed that the districts were unlawful because they featured too many black voters, and diminished their power across the state and in other districts. …Eh? They saying it’s the whites voting Democrat? Having “too many black voters” in new districts is gerrymandering?
Still waiting on the huge gerrymandering case. That and the census and cross cases will tell us a lot about Kavanaugh (and some more about that weasel Roberts).
The decision was based on standing, saying that the House of Delegates could not appeal the decision of the 11th Circuit on grounds that the State Attorney General, who has the statutory authority to act on behalf of he State of Virginia had declined to appeal. The State Attorney General had the standing to be the single voice for the State of Virginia.
Technical Foul. The question now, can someone with standing file an appeal? Aren’t the people, not just the politicians, affected by this ruling?
You can’t resolve this gerrymandering situation, unless you write a two-line Constitutional text item which says you have to use countylines as the dividing point. Once you establish that standard, all of these continual challenges (probably a dozen every decade) would go away.
There are dozens of US counties that would be entitled to more than one CD, so the court cases would continue.
Thomas is clearly the best judge we have. Gorsuch agreeing with him is a great sign.
Never mind. I misread the composition of judges.
Make that, only Democrat JUDGES can gerrymander.
The irony (or is it hypocrisy?)
It was blacks and Democrats who demanded gerrymandered districts to ensure blacks would win seats in Congress.
They created their own voting ghettos.
Now they claim they're unfair.
Many thanks for your concise explanation of where the justices differed in their opinions. I was hoping that I’d have time to read through this one because of the unusual mixture of opinions ...
Nah. Most of us pay attention to the big ticket items that divide along political affiliation. But the Court has many of these decisions where for one reason or another the Justices split along non-political lines. Sometimes, it’s the facts of the case. Others, they actually have a position that aligns with a group you would never expect to see assembled.
That’s because a judge ordered a redistricting done by a university professor, not the legislature.
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.