Posted on 06/27/2023 7:24:35 AM PDT by mooncoin
See how this works? Right and wrong are defined by who wants it.
States like Maryland, New York and California are such models for congressional redistricting, right?
The circumstances behind these cases are different, despite both involving redistricting.
In North Carolina, the question involved the authority of the state’s own Supreme Court in determining (under the state constitution of North Carolina) whether a political redistricting constituted gerrymandering or not.
In Louisiana, the Supreme Court simply lifted its stay on the prior lower court’s decision, as they judged they had taken over the process “prematurely.” The case in Louisiana will have to go through the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals first before heading back to the SCOTUS.
Louisana’s case, much like the recent Alabama decision (Allen v. Milligan), hinges on provisions from the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and prior SCOTUS jurisprudence on the matter.
Louisana’s case involved the Votings Right Act. North Carolina’s, as far as I’m aware, did not.
What’s with this “rape boy” Kavanaugh talk? Are you liberal?
Sounds like the Supremes ruled the other way, that even if you take over the legislature, there should still be checks and balances (such as the courts) to prevent you from just redrawing all the districts in your favor.
How dare you bring facts into this discussion!
I know, right?
Sometimes, there are “knee jerk” reactions on Free Republic, in which people immediately decry that certain judges have gone liberal on us, because the result was not what some Freepers hoped for.
It is good to know the facts and legal issues involved in these cases, rather than rushing to judgement, and proclaiming that certain judges have violated conservative values and all that.
I know, I’m terrible. Just awful.
OK. Well, we the voters in North Carolina took care of this by throwing out two Democrat judges and electing two Republican judges in the last election. That turned a 4-3 majority Democrat State Supreme Court into a 5-2 Republican State Supreme Court.
One of the first things the new state supreme court did was reverse everything the previous supreme court did. So the voter ID law is reinstated and the districting map passed by the Legislature will be the one that governs in the next election.....which will mean North Carolina’s 7-7 US House delegation is likely to go back to 10-4 or 11-3 Republican.
You’ll burn in Hell for this. Or get banned.
The legislature didn’t chit on the state constitution in North Carolina.
The Democrats, seeing that they were losing their hold on the levers of power, go their majority on the state Supreme Court to go absolutely insane and start legislating from the Bench. They overturned the state’s voter ID law passed 4 years ago by referendum “cuz racism”. Nevermind that no showing of racism was made or that requiring voters to show ID does not in any way inconvenience people of a certain race since it is easy to obtain valid government issued photo ID. The state would even waive the $10 fee and provide them for free to those who claimed they were too poor to get one.
When the state legislature passed the Congressional districting map which the governor even signed as part of a compromise, the Democrat state supreme court again threw out the map and drew their own because............let’s see if you can guess what the legal justification was.........
......................
I’m sure you’ll never guess why
“cuz racism” of course. No actual evidence of racism provided. Just “cuz racism” with the standard of proof being “cuz we think so”.
Not good.
If a state has say three House seats divide the voter last names three ways.
first congressional seat: a-h
second congressional seat: i-q
third congressional seat: r-z
I, Brian Griffin, would be voting on the first congressional seat.
This kills off gerrymandering and relieves the legislatures and the courts of redistricting hassles.
“it is easy to obtain valid government issued photo ID”
It is easier for me to get a passport than a Florida ID card.
After Florida 2000, Soros invested heavily to sway state Attorney Generals (or Secretaries of State) and State Supreme Courts.
These are elections most people do not pay attention to and Soros turned many courts to Democrat majorities.
In Pennsylvania, the State Supreme Court was singularly responsible for redrawing congressional districts and implementing ballot harvesting.
We took our eye off the election ball and lost the game.
Correct. But Judges in other states like Wisconsin will take advantage of this ruling. So the SCOTUS should have dropped this case when the circumstances have changed since the original complaint.
I'm not ready to judge the justices by these two decisions. And not ready to criticize them. And regarding justices, this is one area I am happy with Trump's choices.
Some folks are just knee jerk emotional unable to control themselves because every decision not in their favor is not a “win” no matter the law.
"Supreme Court rules against Republicans [??? emphasis added] in North Carolina elections dispute"
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
Since political parties are not defined, or even mentioned in the Constitution (what's that?) post-FDR era, politically biased Supreme Court justices are wrongly interfering with state sovereignty on this issue imo.
Regarding 2024 elections, it's up to Democratic and Republican patriots to initiate the final stage of Trump 47's second term mission to finish draining the swamp by primarying as many of our beloved state and federal lawmakers and executives as we can.
After all, lawmakers and executives continue to show that they do not have the patriotism and leadership skills necessary to find legislative support for effective remedies for unconstitutional government policies.
In fact, given that one of the very few powers that the states have expressly constitutionally given to the unconstitutionally big federal government to dictate domestic policy is to run the Mail Service (most federal domestic policy actually based on stolen state powers), the worst problem that the peacetime country would otherwise be looking at with a new Congress of freshman lawmakers is a delay with mail delivery.
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;"
Trump can endorse candidates that Constitution-savvy patriots recommend as long as candidates are not incumbents, candidates also promising to repeal the 16th (direct taxes) and 17th (popular voting for federal senators) Amendments after they win office.
The definition of insanity is reelecting your beloved career state and federal lawmakers and executives over and over again, expecting those same politicians to find remedies for unconstitutional government policies every time.
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.