Posted on 06/29/2019 8:14:26 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
In a much-awaited decision, the Supreme Court held on Thursday in a 5-4 decision that partisan gerrymandering is a political question beyond the reach of the federal courts.
This should come as no surprise, since it’s the same conclusion the court reached the last time this issue was before it in 2004 in a case out of Pennsylvania, Vieth v. Jubelirer.
This time, plaintiffs in both Maryland and North Carolina challenged congressional redistricting maps, claiming they discriminated against Republicans in Maryland and Democrats in North Carolina.
They argued that such partisan redistricting (i.e. engaging in politics when drawing legislative district lines to benefit candidates of one political party) violated the First and 14th Amendments, as well as the elections clause and Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution. District courts in both cases ruled in their favor.
However, the Supreme Court, in an opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts and joined by the other (generally) conservative justices, concluded that this is a nonjusticiable political question for which there is a lack of discoverable and manageable standards.
The chief justice noted that “partisan gerrymandering is nothing new,” and neither is “frustration with it.”
Partisan redistricting was known “in the colonies prior to independence and the framers were familiar with it at the time of the drafting and ratification of the Constitution.”
Yet, the delegates at the Constitutional Convention who drafted the Constitution assigned the authority to draw political boundaries to state legislatures, checked and balanced by Congress, with no suggestion that the federal courts had a role to play in the process.
According to the majority, a contrary decision holding that legislators cannot take their partisan interests into account when drawing lines would countermand the Framers’ own decision.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailysignal.com ...
Combined General and Maryland “Freak State” PING!
This almost unheard of act forwarding Judicial restraint is the most hopeful thing for our nation I have seen this summer.
NOBODY is unbiased, no body...
The issue rightly belongs in the political arena, not in the hands of the administrative state.
Redistricting was always meant to be a legislative branch action, not a judicial branch action.
When remapping affects and disrupts the control and administration of essential services for entities it does become a serious problem for those residing in that entity’s boundaries.
Absolutely the right decision, but still surprised the Supremes, especially John “Penaltax” Roberts, got this right.
During the time of the framers it was not beinng used to take food from one tablexand give to another, especially those who are not citizens.
The federalized welfare state makes this unconstitutional.
Thhats like saying the Bible did not specifically say child abuse is sinful.
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.