12/13/2005

Supremes to hear constitutional challenge to Texas gerrymandering

Nice.The wheel turns, slowly, but it turns.

posted by Chris Dykstra @ 4:09 AM | |

1 Comments:

At 10:46 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Talk about the potential to overturn a precedent of the over reaching Warren Court. I'm not a lawyer but I can think of 6 potential outcomes and only one is good for the Dems. (Remember that its the Dem's appealing, the appeals court already upheld the redistricting unanimiously and the PA precedent is pretty strongly in favor of Texas.)

1. They can uphold the decision, without comment, vidicating Delay et all. This affirms precedent and given the pending Alito vote will make it hard for Dems to complain.

2. They will uphold it because the changes resulted in more actual, not less minority representation. No harm, no foul, but it reaffirms the Warren decision that requires majority-minority districts. (political compromise)

3. They can uphold it, and narrow the voting rights act, or even sunset it as they have done with affirmative action. An interesting arguement for this is that women are under represented in congress too, yet there are no women majority districts, making black or hispanic districts promotes unequal representation among different minorities.

4. They will uphold it because some level of gerrymandering is permissible. The Dems did it when they controled the TX legislature, and now that the GOP does, they get to do it too. (Reality based decision, not likely)

5. They will uphold it beause its the legislature's job, not the courts to set up districts and if the court has to do it interim, that doesn't mean the legislature can't eventually get its act togather. (Checks and balance decision.)

This last one allows the redistricting to stand, limits the power of the courts, while still preventing redistricting every 1 or 2 years.

6. They overturn it because Texas didn't show that it didn't have a non-discriminitory effect. Of course that opens the door for Texas to resubmit with the increased minority representation as evidence. So even if they overturn it, it would still likely be affirmed down the road.

We'll see.

-Censored

 

Post a Comment

<< Home