Posted on 06/08/2023 8:06:57 AM PDT by mooncoin
The Supreme Court on Thursday issued a surprising 5-4 ruling in favor of Black voters in a congressional redistricting case, ordering the creation of a second district with a large Black population.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined with the court’s liberals in affirming a lower-court ruling that found a likely violation of the Voting Rights Act in an Alabama congressional map with one majority Black seat out of seven congressional districts in a state where more than one in four residents is Black.
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...
I continue to believe that the beatings that the dems inflicted upon Kavanaugh during his confirmation process gave him a case of political Stockholm syndrome. This causes him to do things sometimes for no reason other than to try to prove to his previous accusers that he’s not as “bad” as they claimed.
The Constitution was abolished in 1964 by the Civil Rights Act.
There’s no mechanism for removing a fraudulently installed President either. And yet the people have the right to do so. The 9th and 10th Amendments and the Declaration of Independence acknowledge that right.
We’re in uncharted territory so the mechanism is unclear. The people will have to create the mechanism. Living with an illegitimate Supreme Court Justice for the next 30 years is not an acceptable option for a free people.
LOL. Total BS. Souter, Stevens, Earl Warren, Blackmun... even Roberts is more liberal than Kavanaugh.
True. Thomas and Scalia often find themselves siding with the police state. I simply do not understand the deference they are willing to give.
The Republicans have six of those seven safe seats, this is needlessly handing a SAFE seat to the Demonrats. Without the Civil Rights Act, the GOP could draw all 7 to be Republican. This is court-sanctioned stealing by illegal and unconstitutional means.
Post #106.
40% of California is conservative, then Cali should be forced to redraw their districts to insure that 40% of conservatives get elected!
This is INSANE!
you simply divide the current black district into 2, and combine to the other smallest white districts.
How would that be accomplished so that the big cities down overwhelm the rural areas?
Please don't give the liberals in NY, CA, IL any new ideas.
Ok
Apparently Kav was carefully selected by departing Justice Anthony Kennedy as his direct replacement.
I'm not so sure about that. Nevada has four House seats. There are about 3.1 million people in the state. 2.3 million of them live in the Las Vegas metro area, and another 650,000 live in metropolitan Reno.
In an at-large election involving multiple candidates, the winner may very well get two million votes. Someone has to finish in fourth place, and there's no certainty that the fourth-place finisher will get most of his or her votes from the two biggest cities. The second House district, which covers the northern half of the entire state, has about the same number of voters as any of the other three districts -- so a candidate from this area should easily be able to finish among the top four in a statewide election.
But in an at-large election, with four seats in play, does the voter pick one or four candidates?
That may have mattered in the past, but people have started to wise up to the cynical games these disingenuous A-holes play in Washington. A Republican who is with you 99% of the time is likely to stand against you the one time his vote actually matters.
See Rep. Thomas Massie as a perfect example of this. He is the conservative/libertarian Freedom Caucus icon who made a name for himself by standing up on principle and opposing government spending bills even if he was the only one on the losing end of a 420-1 vote in Congress. He also spent his career in Congress railing against endless government spending and crushing Federal debt.
Within the last couple of weeks he signed on to the House debt ceiling elimination bill. As one Freeper noted, he collapsed like a plastic Walmart lawn chair under Chris Christie.
We're tired of elected officials voting with their constituents 70% -- or even 99% -- of the time when their votes don't matter ... but then bailing out and showing their true colors when they are finally faced with a consequential issue where their vote really matters.
That's a good question. I assumed each voter picks only ONE candidate. If each voter picks up to four candidates, then your concern about the big cities dominating a statewide race would be a valid one.
There's also an intriguing option where each voter is given four ballots and can pick up to four candidates, but can also opt to cast multiple votes for a candidate. Basically, a voter can vote for four different candidates, cast four votes for one candidate, or anything in between. I'm not sure that's a good idea, but it would definitely make things interesting and unpredictable.
To reach this path, district 7 (taking up Birmingham interior, Montgomery area, and the whole of mid-west Alabama...the least populated area of the state, but about 70-percent black)....you’d water-down the black vote in district 7. I’d take a wild guess by any drawing...probably one-vote of the black vote would have to be dropped into the next district.
Some people believe the intent of the challenge is to create a pure-Birmingham-only district...having nothing to do with Selma or the mid-west part of the state.
The problem with this idea is that a lot of the population of Birmingham have drifted off to 20/30 miles outside of the city (they still work there). The city district they imagine simply doesn’t have the population base to support a Birmingham-only district.
If you talked of gerrymandering and then added up the angles of district 7....there’s probably over 300 angles/curves to it. This current design was set-up in 1993, and today....it’s a plus-14 percent deal on Democratic control. Carving anything off...lessens the control.
Only D justices vote consistently.
Not sure what the solution is. Your message comes across as “you want it all” in regards to Republicans voting for the issues that are important to you. I wish they did. But that’s not how the US political system has ever worked. Short of a parliamentary system where snap elections can be called or prorogation of Parliament can be declared, or some sort of strongman government, the system we have works well. And the parties conform themselves to our current system.
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.