Posted on 01/10/2012 7:21:50 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic
Former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement told U.S. Supreme Court justices Monday that lower federal courts cannot redraw state-approved election district maps unless they can point to concrete "identifying specific statutory or constitutional violations." Instead, Clement said during oral arguments on Perry v. Perez, two federal district judges have nullified the will of the people in Texas. The evident frustration of at least some of the Supreme Court justices suggests they agree with Gov. Rick Perry that state sovereignty must be restored.
Clement represented Perry and the state of Texas in an appeal of lower court decisions throwing out new congressional and state legislative election districts earlier this year.
Like every state, Texas redrew its legislative lines after the 2010 census as the U.S. Constitution requires. Groups unhappy with the new maps then sued, alleging violations of the Voting Rights Act.
In Texas, a three-judge federal district court heard arguments that the new map violates Section 2 of the VRA, which makes it illegal for states to enact voting changes with the purpose or effect of reducing racial minorities' voting strength.
The Lone Star State's congressional delegation has grown from 32 members to 36, thanks to population growth. Texas thus needs a map with 36 congressional districts.
The court held in a 2-1 decision that Texas' new map violates Section 2. So the federal court drew its own maps for the people of Texas -- assigning to them a completely different lineup of districts for the Texas legislature and Texas members of the U.S. House.
Supreme Court precedent makes clear that legislative redistricting is among the most delicate tasks state governments perform, balancing numerous political factors devoid of any legal principles courts can apply.
Yet two judges swept aside those admonitions, drawing districts out of whole cloth based on what they called "fairness" and the "collective public good."
They created what are called "minority coalition opportunity districts" in which a majority of the population is made up of the combined totals for blacks, Hispanics and other racial minorities.
The theory behind this wrongheaded stereotyping is that all minorities vote the same way, so, if they reside in the same district, they will elect a minority member as their preferred candidate.
Complicating matters, Texas is a "covered jurisdiction" under Section 5 of the VRA, meaning the state must get permission from Attorney General Eric Holder or the federal court in the District of Columbia before changing its districting lines. But D.C. has not cleared Texas' new maps.
So the Supreme Court heard arguments Monday on an expedited schedule in Perry v. Perez.
Clement faced off against the plaintiffs' lawyer, Jose Garza, and President Obama's Deputy Solicitor General Sri Srinvasan.
Texas' primary was scheduled for March (now April). Given its imminence, Clement argued if the legislature's maps have problems, they must be used as interim maps until being fixed, instead of judges inventing new maps. At a minimum, Texas should use all parts of the maps not at issue in court.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor cut him off, saying that Section 5 means the maps cannot be used for any purpose until they gain final approval.
At one point Monday, the court's proceedings became heated when, after Justice Stephen Breyer repeatedly interrupted Clement, Chief Justice John Roberts intervened to enable Clement to finish his answer.
The issues in this case echo Perry's campaign emphasis on federalism and the 10th Amendment. He argues that Texans should be able to decide how to draw their election districts without interference from Washington so long as they don't violate the Constitution or federal law.
Other VRA cases are headed toward the Supreme Court, so voting rights could become a major issue in the 2012 election. A decision in Perry v. Perez is expected within weeks.
Examiner
legal contributor Ken Klukowski is on faculty at Liberty University and on faculty with the American Civil Rights Union.
I used to write in candidates all the time until I realized how much trouble it causes the electrion clerks. Now, I reserve my write-in privilege for targeted purposes. We almost knocked off 3 school board members in a write in campaign that was organized and accomplished in 2 weeks. Scared the daylights out of the school board. I didn’t mind tabulating those votes at all.
Our founders had a big advantage over us.
They had the Atlantic ocean and 18th century communications incubating their experiments from the entrenched classes.
In our advanced stages of political disease, we’re pretty well hosed because the nearest federal court is just a few counties away from any vulnerable freedom or liberty.
I see that you and I are on the same page after all.
Out here in West Texas we have two sorry Congressmen who abhor the idea of Impeaching Bolshevik Chairman Obama. Our TEA Party guy got knocked out by the Big Red RINO Machine, so I wanted to let our RINO know that he may have won the election, but we are not going away.
BTW, we’ve had 18 inches of snow this winter. What is your total snowfall now?
Yes, it is a sorry situation. Instead of securing our unalienable rights, our government suppresses them.
BUMP!
Thank you for the post.
In order for government to biblically legitimate,
it must reward righteousness and punish wickedness.
This government is doing the opposite, and is therefore illegitimate.
But all you need as a candidate is 300 signatures to get on the ballot in Texas, (and maybe some fees) unlike the bozos in Virginia.
“two federal district judges have nullified the will of the people in Texas. . . . In Texas, a three-judge federal district court heard arguments that the new map violates Section 2 of the VRA, which makes it illegal for states to enact voting changes with the purpose or effect of reducing racial minorities’ voting strength. . . . The court held in a 2-1 decision that Texas’ new map violates Section 2. So the federal court drew its own maps for the people of Texas — assigning to them a completely different lineup of districts for the Texas legislature and Texas members of the U.S. House. . . . Yet two judges swept aside those admonitions, drawing districts out of whole cloth based on what they called “fairness” and the “collective public good.” They created what are called “minority coalition opportunity districts” in which a majority of the population is made up of the combined totals for blacks, Hispanics and other racial minorities.”
I think I read that one of the two federale judges who came up with their own ethnic gerrymandered districts was a Hispanic that had been recommended by Perry and picked by Bush.
I’m not sure that our snowfall in the Milwaukee area has been measureable this season. Less than 1/4 inch. There has been one slippery day this year, but the snow was gone by 9 AM. Supposed to change next week.
I didn’t even wear a coat to work today — just a big Irish sweater. But, I’m smart enough to have my coat in the car, just in case.
18 inches sounds like our regular winters.
The problem with our write-in law in WI is that even though the election clerks have to record and tabulate all those write ins, nobody except the clerks ever know about them. They are never published in the newspaper (except when we staged the write ins to take over the school board.)
There are 2 kinds of write ins -- official (registered) and spontaneous. Both kinds have to be recorded and tabulated, but only "registered" write-ins have the opportunity to actually take office if they get the most votes.
Registered (official) write ins are used by people who did not file their papers within the time limit to be listed on the ballot. We are actually allowed to distribute stickers for people to put those names on their ballots (I'm waiting for the day that those stickers gum up the electronic ballot box!) To be an official registered write-in candidate you have to register with the election authority in your municipality, or district, that you intend to run for office as a write-in and will serve if elected.
Where are you in West TX? I used to live in the Houston area, and I cannot remember if I ever wrote in a candidate there. Probably did, because I used to do it a lot. That was 30 years ago. And that was before I realized how hard it made the job for the people working the polls.
If we went back to such small Congressional districts, then there would be well over 10,000 congressman. You think it’s difficult for congress to work on anything now, try giving it the population of a large town. Even the parliament of India, the largest legislative body in the world, representing over a billion people, only has about 800 members.
Thanks shield.
An aristocratic House of a few, out of touch members who use the perks of office to secure their lavish benefits was precisely what they feared, and is exactly what we have today.
This is an example of why it is SO IMPORTANT for the GOP to take back the presidency. We don’t need another Kagan on the USSC or we are screwed.
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.