Posted on 06/27/2019 9:19:37 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
On Thursday, the Supreme Court showed how much difference who wins the presidency makes.
Armed with a five to four conservative majority thanks to President Donald Trump's appointment of Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh over the past two years, the Supreme Court said it had no role to play in partisan gerrymandering -- a decision that amounts to a massive political victory for Republicans, not just in the moment, but also likely for the next decade-plus.
While the court didn't give Republicans everything they wanted on Thursday -- rejecting the addition of a citizenship question to the census that the Trump administration had pushed for -- the ruling on line-drawing with political concerns as a primary motivation is an absolute game-changer for a party that has already reaped the considerable rewards of its ongoing domination at the state legislative level.
What SCOTUS said Thursday was, essentially, if state legislators want to draw the lines of their own districts and those of their members of Congress using political calculations, it's not the court's job to stop them. That state legislatures are given that power and can exert it as they see fit.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
There’s a lawsuit against the Dems latest tactic of having leftist state judges draw the districts which has happened in PA, OH and VA. What’s the status of that?
Illegals not only don’t have any right to be here, they also have no right to be counted in the census. John Roberts is an ass.
It will motivate GOP voters who realize Roberts is just another Anthony Kennedy, and PDJT must be reelected to get a larger SCOTUS majority.
IMHO there is something that doesn’t quite add up with Roberts.
He was being hard nosed on the court. Then Obama started spying on Americans and Antonin Scalia was killed. Roberts rolled, he has something to hide. IMO.
“Roberts rolled, he has something to hide. IMO”
The simpler and easier explanation is that he’s a RINO.
As if Democrats are not guilty of gerrymandering or will not benefit from this decision as well.
“he has something to hide.”
Yes, something just doesn’t seem right.
As if Democrats are not guilty of gerrymandering or will not benefit from this decision as well.
Democrats do gerrymandering in places where they are in control. yes they will benefit in some places.
What is not said here, is that Republicans control the big majority of state legislatures as of now, and so more Republicans will be in charge of redistricting than Democrats.
Maybe Roberts saw what happened to Scalia and decided he wanted to live a few more years so he’d better start getting with the democrat program.
Back President Trump’s effort to make certain the census form contains the citizenship question in it and no reference to race. But to the country of where the respondent is a citizen of if not an American citizen.
TIME TO END HYPHENATING AMERICANS
One thing the Mexican Constitution has that we should consider doing.Mexico has no hyphenated Mexicans. They prohibit any reference to race when they conduct a census or issue any means of identification, Where a photo id is not available physical description is needed skin color yes but not by race but by nationality..
By doing this Mexico has avoided “balkanizing”, creating fractional disputes in areas where a given group in one of its states is a majority or a minority. Plus it could play a significant part in shutting down the political playing off racial divisions between Americans by the Democrats.
From Justice John Marshall Harlan’s dissent to Reynolds v. Sims (1964):
. . . these decisions give support to a current mistaken view of the Constitution and the constitutional function of this court. This view, in a nutshell, is that every major social ill in this country can find its cure in some constitutional “principle,” and that this court should “take the lead” in promoting reform when other branches of government fail to act. The Constitution is not a panacea for every blot upon the public welfare, nor should this court, ordained as a judicial body, be thought of as a general haven for reform movements.
The Constitution is an instrument of government, fundamental to which is the premise that in a diffusion of governmental authority lies the greatest promise that this Nation will realize liberty for all its citizens. This court, limited in function in accordance with that premise, does not serve its high purpose when it exceeds its authority, even to satisfy justified impatience with the slow workings of the political process. For when, in the name of constitutional interpretation, the court adds something to the Constitution that was deliberately excluded from it, the court, in reality, substitutes its view of what should be so for the amending process.
Oh, this sounds good. I haven’t heard this conspiracy theory yet. You think Scalia was assassinated, perhaps by some state-sponsored agent armed with a top-secret weapon that makes you die in your sleep from old age?
“Oh, this sounds good. I haven’t heard this conspiracy theory yet. You think Scalia was assassinated, perhaps by some state-sponsored agent armed with a top-secret weapon that makes you die in your sleep from old age?”
Yea, it’s pretty much a given, especially when they wouldn’t allow an autopsy - even though he died suddenly when not under medical care.
“The simpler and easier explanation is that he’s a RINO.”
Even simpler is he interprets the law how he sees it and sometimes the liberals are on the right side of an issue. The court is not supposed to be conservative or liberal. Gorsuch, Roberts and Kavanaugh have written majority opinions that went against Alito, and Thomas.
In the end, this is why we need 9 constitutionalists on the bench. If we had that we would still see opinions that intellectually differ. I’m good with that.
“...he has something to hide. “
I agree with you. He couldn’t just vote on Obamacare, he had to re-write it and stand on one foot whistling “Theme from Love Story” while juggling cats - to make sure it passed.
He’s got that “someone forgot to take their stringer of fish home yesterday” smell.
Blackmail or pandering, I’m not sure which.
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.