Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

  • Shop
  • Subscribe to BMG
  • Contact
  • Log In
  • Front Page
  • All Posts
  • About
  • Rules
  • Events
  • Register on BMG

Did Gerrymander get the boot today?

January 9, 2018 By AmberPaw

A Federal Court in North Carolina issued a 205 page opinion striking down the recent changes in electoral districts for congress in that state. Did that truly give Ol’Gerrymander a boot? Likely the issue is now headed for the USSCT. Read it and tell me what you think: 

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0
0

Filed Under: Editor, User

Comments

  1. Christopher says

    January 9, 2018 at 10:34 pm

    Honestly, I have never understood the constitutional case against gerrymandering. I don’t like it, but it seems the only constitutional question is if the numbers are equitable.

    • bob-gardner says

      January 10, 2018 at 8:50 am

      “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.” Anatole France.
      Equitable like this, Christopher?

    • marcus-graly says

      January 10, 2018 at 9:19 am

      It rather clearly runs afoul of the notions of freedom of association and equal protection of the law, the problem has always been a judicially enforceable standard. Prior to the 1960s the court allowed districts to be unequal population too, which led to tremendous inequalities in representation. What is the fundamental difference between cutting, say, Austin, TX into six different districts so that none of its Congressmen represent its interests, verses giving it a very large district? Both of it ensure it has less representation, but you only think one is unconstitutional?

      • Christopher says

        January 10, 2018 at 3:51 pm

        Unequal populations clearly violate equal protection, but I don’t see a constitutional case for basically saying we can’t elect the people we want.

  2. marcus-graly says

    January 10, 2018 at 9:28 am

    My concern is that this decision’s logic only really works because the NC Republicans openly and brazenly proclaimed that they were creating a partisan Gerrymander, which itself was an intentional defense against charges of racial Gerrymandering. Future legislatures will not be so foolish.

    • jconway says

      January 10, 2018 at 9:44 am

      That’s the big issue with the Supreme Court weighing in. It may be that they finally just mandate independent redistricting commissions for all 50 states. Or That seems to be the equitable solution. Otherwise if you narrow the scope to race, they will find a way around it. If you narrow the scope to politics, people will find a way around it. I am glad the MD case is coming under scrutiny too. This is not a fundamentally partisan issue, even if Democrats have been primarily on the receiving end of the losses lately. Maryland and Illinois are prime suspects as well, as was California before it’s voters adopted independent redistricting. MMP (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-member_proportional_representation) would be an even better result, but surely a pipe dream.

  3. petr says

    January 10, 2018 at 11:55 am

    A Federal Court in North Carolina issued a 205 page opinion striking down the recent changes in electoral districts for congress in that state. Did that truly give Ol’Gerrymander a boot? Likely the issue is now headed for the USSCT

    The Supreme Court already heard Gill v Whitford this term and will hear this one also.

    The question has never been whether or no to give gerrymandering the boot, but how to come up with legally clean tests to determine A) if it is occurring for solely partisan reasons and 2) methods of drawing maps that are both equitable and constitutionally permissible: in previous cases the Supremes as much as said ‘if you can prove it, we’ll strike it down.’

    • Trickle up says

      January 10, 2018 at 1:21 pm

      Don’t forget iii): whether partisan gerrymandering that is not racially motivated is permissible under the Constitution. (I know what I’d say, but that is not the point.)

      • Christopher says

        January 10, 2018 at 3:54 pm

        So many permutations, which is exactly why constitutionally none of it should matter. Nobody is counted as 3/5 of a person anymore so everything else is a political question.

        • bob-gardner says

          January 11, 2018 at 7:04 am

          That was the argument in Plessy v Fergueson, that as long as there was some kind of lip service paid to “equality” that pretty much nothing else mattered an the courts should just stay out of it.
          Or the arguments used to justify “literacy tests” for voting because, after all, the tests apply to everyone.
          Or poll taxes, since they apply to everyone.
          It’s true that it will take some judgment and study to decide between different interests and different arguments, but that’s the reason that we have courts. You seem to be arguing that your willful ignorance should be enough to decide constitutional questions.

          • Christopher says

            January 11, 2018 at 3:30 pm

            Poll taxes keep people from voting (and are expressly unconstitutional per amendment). Literacy tests are irrelevant and WERE applied unequally. Plus have you seen these “literacy” tests? Some of them at least weren’t so much about literacy as they were brain teasers designed to be confusing.

            • bob-gardner says

              January 11, 2018 at 6:19 pm

              Until someone went to court, all these things were just political questions.

  4. centralmassdad says

    January 12, 2018 at 2:49 pm

    The argument in Gill v. Whitford was pretty interesting to listen to. It sure seemed to me like there are 5 justices who think that the practice is grossly undemocratic and corrupt, but I don’t think there are 5 that think that there is a way for the judiciary to (i) identify the problem, even in marginal cases, and (ii) remedy it, in a way that is not also grossly undemocratic and corrupt.

    The founders were correct in identifying the toxic effect of political parties, but, alas, quite naive in their belief that we would never be afflicted by them.

    Plaintiffs originally had a pretty neat idea using statistics, counting something they called “voting efficiency” which measures how likely your vote is to be meaningful in an actual rather than purely symbolic sense. A vote is less meaningful in a gerrymandered district than in a competitive one. And because there are gerrymander-proof elections, like for state-wide office or Senate, you can account for the overall political tilt of the state. Unfortunately, I think that the justices are concerned that the subtleties of statistics will be lost on the majority of voters, which would compromise the political legitimacy of any judicial evaluation. I gather that the plaintiffs backed away from the statistics, but that leaves the overall problem of devising a workable judicial solution.

    Alas, because an end to the pernicious practice would be immensely beneficial to the governance of our own state.

Recommended Posts

  • No posts liked yet.

Recent User Posts

Predictions Open Thread

December 22, 2022 By jconway

This is why I love Joe Biden

December 21, 2022 By fredrichlariccia

Garland’s Word

December 19, 2022 By terrymcginty

Some Parting Thoughts

December 19, 2022 By jconway

Beware the latest grift

December 16, 2022 By fredrichlariccia

Thank you, Blue Mass Group!

December 15, 2022 By methuenprogressive

Recent Comments

  • blueeyes on Beware the latest griftSo where to, then??
  • Christopher on Some Parting ThoughtsI've enjoyed our discussions as well (but we have yet to…
  • Christopher on Beware the latest griftI can't imagine anyone of our ilk not already on Twitter…
  • blueeyes on Beware the latest griftI will miss this site. Where are people going? Twitter?…
  • chrismatth on This site (will be disabled on) December 31, 2022I joined BMG late - 13 years ago next month and three da…
  • SomervilleTom on Geopolitics of FusionEVERY un-designed, un-built, and un-tested technology is…
  • Charley on the MTA on This site (will be disabled on) December 31, 2022That’s a great idea, and I’ll be there on Sunday. It’s a…

Archive

@bluemassgroup on Twitter

#mapoli

mbaenews MBAE-Massachusetts Business Alliance for Education @mbaenews ·
8m

Access to #StudentPathways in every MA high school is pivotal to ensuring that today’s students have the knowledge & skills for tomorrow’s careers, and a robust, equitable economy.

Read more from: @JayAshMACP @edlambertjr & Cheryl Stanley #maedu #mapoli

Reply on Twitter 1620132072739438592 Retweet on Twitter 1620132072739438592 Like on Twitter 1620132072739438592 Twitter 1620132072739438592
charliemassact Charlie Keller 🌹🏳️‍🌈 @charliemassact ·
15m

Solidarity to the Woburn teachers courageously striking today. #UnionStrong

They're lighting a path to the worker power & democracy our Commonwealth, facing sky-high economic & racial inequality, needs now more than ever. #mapoli

#UnionsForAll
#WorkerPower
#WorkerDemocracy

WTA @WoburnTeachers

THANK YOU WOBURN!! Thank you to everyone who showed up to today's rally. We had 500+ people show.

Thank you to all of the families, the community supporters, local unions, the students, and the businesses who all showed their support!!

Reply on Twitter 1620130321655287808 Retweet on Twitter 1620130321655287808 Like on Twitter 1620130321655287808 Twitter 1620130321655287808
brianpjencunas Brian Jencunas @brianpjencunas ·
15m

Good insights from two #mapoli natives.

Joe Caiazzo @joecaiazzo

Is a divided Congress good for Biden’s re-election prospects? We think so. Take a look at lmk what you think. #mapoli #nhpolitics https://commonwealthmagazine.org/opinion/divided-congress-could-be-good-for-biden/

Reply on Twitter 1620130232215961601 Retweet on Twitter 1620130232215961601 Like on Twitter 1620130232215961601 Twitter 1620130232215961601
joecaiazzo Joe Caiazzo @joecaiazzo ·
17m

Is a divided Congress good for Biden’s re-election prospects? We think so. Take a look at lmk what you think. #mapoli #nhpolitics https://commonwealthmagazine.org/opinion/divided-congress-could-be-good-for-biden/

Reply on Twitter 1620129874701873152 Retweet on Twitter 1620129874701873152 1 Like on Twitter 1620129874701873152 1 Twitter 1620129874701873152
tednesi Ted Nesi @tednesi ·
21m

.@jmart tags @maura_healey as one of the newly elected Northeastern governors who are going to be part of POTUS candidate speculation for the foreseeable future #mapoli https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/01/26/democratic-bench-josh-shapiro-wes-moore-00079538

Reply on Twitter 1620128739882582016 Retweet on Twitter 1620128739882582016 Like on Twitter 1620128739882582016 3 Twitter 1620128739882582016
openletterbot Open Letters @openletterbot ·
22m

🖋 Sign Cherokee Delegate and I'll deliver a copy to your officials: https://twitter.com/messages/compose?recipient_id=835740314006511618&text=sign%20PGELSF 📨 No. 1 is from Vanessa to @SenMarkey, @RepMcGovern, @SenWarren and 1 more #MApoli #MApols

Reply on Twitter 1620128548995608576 Retweet on Twitter 1620128548995608576 Like on Twitter 1620128548995608576 Twitter 1620128548995608576
Load More

From our sponsors




Google Calendar







Search

Archives

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter




Copyright © 2023 Owned and operated by BMG Media Empire LLC. Read the terms of use. Some rights reserved.