Three-Judge Court Must Be Convened In Constitutional Challenges to Redistricting Maps

CRS Reports and Analysis ^ | 12/21/2015 | Unknown Staff

[House Atreides]

“In a unanimous ruling, on December 8, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a three-judge district court must be convened in cases challenging the constitutionality of redistricting maps. In this case, Shapiro v. McManus, the Court reversed the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and remanded the case for further proceedings. Due to a federal law providing for direct appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court from three-judge court decisions, this ruling could increase the number of redistricting challenges that are considered by the Court.

Background: A federal law, known as the “Three-Judge Court Act,” specifies that constitutional challenges to federal or state legislative districts are to be considered by a three-judge federal district court panel, with direct appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court....“

[House Atreides]

This is important background relevant to TODAY’S decision (by a three-judge panel of judges from the Southern District of New York) blocking an order from President Trump attempting to keep illegal immigrants' census numbers from apportioning congressional districts. This Shapiro vs McManus case means today’s decision (discussed in http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3882914/posts) can be appealed DIRECTLY to the Supreme Court. Of course this appeal would need to be urgent if we want Illegal Alien numbers to not affect Congressional Reapportionment from the 2020 census.

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3882914/posts

[House Atreides]

Hot link: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3882914/posts