Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Legislative redistricting plan rejected
Baltimore Sun ^ | June 11, 2002 | Tom Stuckey

Posted on 06/11/2002 10:46:02 AM PDT by galethus

Edited on 09/03/2002 4:50:38 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

ANNAPOLIS -- The state Court of Appeals struck down Maryland's legislative redistricting plan today and said it will draw up its own districts for election of the 188 members of the General Assembly.

The court ruled the plan prepared by Democratic Gov. Parris N. Glendening violated constitutional requirements that legislative districts be compact. It said the governor also did not give due regard to county boundaries.

The court said it will prepare its own plan.


(Excerpt) Read more at sunspot.net ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Free Republic; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Maryland
KEYWORDS: appeals; court; democratic; maryland; of; overturned; plan; redistricting; unconstitutional
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 last
To: jadimov
Why do we even draw individual congressional districts? Politicians in every state (where there are more than one district) use them to further political agendas.

A good question.

I think the district lines should be where the county lines & city limits are, personally.
That's the way they used to be in NC ... years ago.

What I want to know is how & where the Voting Rights Act is applied, and if it's only in Southern states.

21 posted on 06/11/2002 12:35:47 PM PDT by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: galethus; donald stone; joe montana
I guess the Court of Appeals felt it had to throw this plan out after its judges were illegally contacted by those Democrat leaders of the legislature.
22 posted on 06/11/2002 12:37:09 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
I'd like to say there is hope, but this is Maryland we are talking about. The parasites are firmly in control there. But hey, good news is good news, so for all the decent people still in Maryland, good luck!

I am down on my knees as I type that maybe there is a God and maybe He even looks over the awful state of Merryland.

Glendenning is the creep of all creeps. He needed to have his head handed to him on a platter.

Hey, I'm seeing a crack in the armor. Even the Dems are not enamored of KKT (and she smells to high heaven) and Earlich might have a shot. I hear Helen Bentley is coming back.

I pray now that somehow, someway, the state of Merryland is returned to the citizens who PAY the horrendous taxes. Pleeze, pleeze, pleeze.

23 posted on 06/11/2002 1:21:34 PM PDT by Fishtalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day
.....What I want to know is how & where the Voting Rights Act is applied, and if it's only in Southern states.....

VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 1965

Section 2

A nationwide provision that prohibits the use of voting laws, practices or procedures that discriminate in either purpose or effect on the basis of race, color, or membership in a minority language group. All types of voting practices and procedures are covered by Section 2, including those relating to registration, voting, candidacy qualification, and types of election systems.

Section 4

Sets forth the formula under which a political jurisdiction is "covered" by and, therefore, subject to the preclearance provisions of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

Section 4 has various dates that trigger coverage, e.g., if a jurisdiction used a "test or device" such as a literacy test as of November 1, 1964 and less than 50 percent of the age eligible citizens were registered or voted in 1964, it became a covered jurisdiction. Section 4 further covers a jurisdiction if the jurisdiction provided English-Only voter registration/election materials, contained a registered voting age citizenry (or citizens actually voting) of less than 50 percent, and contained a single language minority group of greater than 5 percent of its citizens.

Covered jurisdictions include the entire States of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia and counties and towns in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, South Dakota and Wyoming.

Section 5

This section was designed to prevent states and other governmental entities with a history of voting discrimination from continuing to devise new ways to discriminate after the abolishment of prior discriminatory practices. Section 5 requires certain covered jurisdictions to submit any proposed voting changes in their election law or practices, prior to implementation, for federal approval by either the Attorney General of the United States or the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia. Covered jurisdictions must demonstrate that the proposed voting changes do not have the purpose or the effect of discriminating against protected racial or language minorities. This process is referred to as the preclearance process.

Minority Language Groups: The minority language groups covered by the Voting Rights Act are Native Americans, Asian Americans, Alaska Natives, and persons of Spanish heritage.

Minority Language Provisions: The Voting Rights Act was amended in 1975 and 1992 to include political jurisdictions with language minority groups and requires such jurisdictions to furnish bi-lingual assistance to language minority citizens at all stages of the voting process and in all elections.

http://www.aclu.org/issues/racial/racevote.html


24 posted on 06/11/2002 1:34:10 PM PDT by jadimov
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

25 posted on 06/11/2002 3:11:47 PM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
LOL !!!!!!!

I'm certain that the Court of Appeals can administer the law in a fair and impartial manner in Maryland.

I'm sure all of the Republicans will have their Districts reassigned to the areas where there are the greatest number of Democrats and zero Republican voters.

ANNAPOLIS -- The state Court of Appeals struck down Maryland's legislative redistricting plan today and said it will draw up its own districts for election of the 188 members of the General Assembly.

26 posted on 06/11/2002 3:50:55 PM PDT by Donald Stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: torie;crasher
Does this effect Congressional map ?
27 posted on 06/11/2002 4:19:41 PM PDT by KQQL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
No.
28 posted on 06/11/2002 4:20:56 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: all
A message from Jim Robinson regarding the fundraiser!
29 posted on 06/11/2002 5:02:58 PM PDT by WIMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie
the demos in MD. live by their own set of rules when they dont go their way the easyest way to do it is change the rules to have things their way with kkt running for govenorthey will keep changing them to get her in office if that doesnt work then they will go back to the grave yard again to get more demo voters I wouldnt be surprized if Jimmy Hoffa votes With Glendenning nothing surprizes me
30 posted on 06/11/2002 7:02:23 PM PDT by oiljake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: FreeTally
Thats what I suspected. Badly drawn lines or not, its not Constitutional for the court to draw them itself. I don't think conservatives should cheer when the Constitution(state or federal) is violated to get our way.

The problem occurs when the authorized power refuses to act in a legal manner. In this situation the available choices are to draw their own districts, use the illegal new districts, use the now worse former district lines, not have a election and have the old legislators stay in office, or to have the election without districts (ie. all seats running at large). This last choice was used in 1964 when the courts threw out the Illinois Congressional (or was it legislative) districting. The parties were told to nominate at large slates to run against each other, but the party leaders arranged for each party to nominate only 2/3 as many candidates as seats, so that each party could count on 1/3 of the seats, and contested one third (in effect). Since this was 1964, it was lucky for the GOP that they did this, since the Goldwater defeat would have lead to an all Democrat legislative body.

What solution would you choose, or is some other choice available?

31 posted on 06/12/2002 12:33:13 AM PDT by Lucius Cornelius Sulla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson