A green light for election corruption.
Partisan gerrymandering is A-OK, ruled the Supreme Court today. Or to interpret the ruling more charitably, the Supreme Court has decided that it's a matter for the states to decide.
By a 5 to 4 vote, in a decision by Justice Roberts, the Supreme Court today said it cannot decide the question of partisan gerrymandering in federal courts.
SCOTUS will not strike down the gerrymandering in North Carolina and Maryland.
Read Kagan's dissent.
Kagan dissent in partisan gerrymandering: "For the first time ever, this Court refuses to remedy a constitutional violation because it thinks the task beyond judicial capabilities." https://t.co/WxGfOuQ2x9 pic.twitter.com/QgCK9ZiWEM
— Mike Scarcella (@MikeScarcella) June 27, 2019
Call this what it is: white patriarchy rigging the game to ward off demographic threats to its continued dominance
— laura olin (@lauraolin) June 27, 2019
Breaking news: In a landmark ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court said declined to strike down excessive partisan gerrymandering in North Carolina and Maryland, saying it was a question beyond the reach of the courts
— Sam Levine (@srl) June 27, 2019
Breaking: The Supreme Court upheld the partisan gerrymandering that has allowed Republicans to control power in several closely divided states. https://t.co/ffWc50UWl2
— Los Angeles Times (@latimes) June 27, 2019
BREAKING: #scotus conservatives say federal courts can't judge whether extreme partisan gerrymandering violates the constitution
— Robert Barnes (@scotusreporter) June 27, 2019
#Scotus gives green light to gerrymandering, ruling holds that federal courts can't review gerrymandering claims, further raising the stakes for the 2020 elections in key states.
— David Lauter (@DavidLauter) June 27, 2019
#SCOTUS rules that partisan-gerrymandering challenges to electoral maps are political questions that are not reviewable in federal court, dismissing challenges by Dem. voters to NC congressional map drawn by Rep. officials and by Rep. voters to 1 district drawn by Dems in Md.
— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 27, 2019
You want to hear from someone who understands gerrymandering and election law?
— Mieke Eoyang (@MiekeEoyang) June 27, 2019
Welp. At least we can serve as an example of what not to do for countries who have heard about this democracy thing and are considering giving it a try. https://t.co/7LjSbI8qYt
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) June 27, 2019
"No one can accuse this Court of having a crabbed view of the reach of its competence." – Roberts, going full ironic self-awareness as he leads the court to self-abnegation in the political gerrymandering case
— Mike Sacks (@MikeSacksEsq) June 27, 2019
This is a fundamentally anti-democratic decision, but it reflects the fact that the conservative ideological project in the united states can only proceed by entrenching countermajoritarian procedural advantages rather than popular support from the people themselves.
— Adam Serwer? (@AdamSerwer) June 27, 2019
the post-2020 census election maps are gonna look like a a jigsaw puzzle crafted via a lathe attached to a malfunctioning spirograph
— Hayes Brown (@HayesBrown) June 27, 2019