Matter of fact, the term 'gerrymandering' was created just a few months ago to give a proper label to this tactic.
All other voting districts are 'completely fair and unpolitical'.
Posted on 08/27/2018 6:21:55 PM PDT by yesthatjallen
A three-judge panel in North Carolina on Monday struck down the state’s Republican-drawn redistricting map as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander for the second time this year.
The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina ruled
Republicans had redrawn the map to unconstitutionally favor their party. The panel reached the same conclusion in January, and the case ultimately made its way to the Supreme Court.
But the justices in June sent the issue back down to the lower court to re-examine whether the plaintiffs had standing to sue in light of their decision in another partisan gerrymandering case out of Wisconsin.
The North Carolina court said the Wisconsin case did not call into question — and, if anything, supported — its previous determination that challengers had standing to assert partisan gerrymandering claims.
In writing the majority opinion, which Judge William Earl Britt joined, Judge James Wynn said partisan gerrymanders “raise the specter that the Government may effectively drive certain ideas or viewpoints from the marketplace” because they “intentionally seek to entrench a favored party in power and make it difficult – if not impossible – for candidates of parties supporting disfavored viewpoints to prevail.”
“That is precisely what the Republican-controlled North Carolina General Assembly sought to do here,” he said.
Wynn said legislative defendants drew a plan designed to subordinate the interests of non-Republican voters not because they believe doing so advances any democratic, constitutional, or public interest, but because, as the chief legislative map drawer openly acknowledged, the General Assembly’s Republican majority “thinks electing Republicans is better than electing Democrats.”
“But that is not a choice the Constitution allows legislative map drawers to make,” he said. “Rather, ‘those who govern should be the last people to help decide who should govern.’”
Common Cause, one of the groups challenging the maps, hailed the court’s decision Monday.
“Common Cause and our partners in this lawsuit took the fight to politicians who manipulate our democracy and we won,” Karen Hobert Flynn, the group’s president, said in a statement.
“We anticipate an appeal and are ready to turn legislators’ brazen partisan gerrymander into a historic ruling in the Supreme Court to end the practice nationwide.”
The court said it has not yet decided if it’s going to give the General Assembly another chance to draw a constitutionally compliant redistricting plan. The court has given Republican state officials until Aug. 31 to file briefs arguing why it should.
If the court agrees to give state officials another chance to draw new maps, Wynn said it will not consider any remedial plans enacted after 5 p.m. on Sept. 17.
But given the Nov. 6 midterm elections are fast-approaching, Wynn said the court finds it appropriate to take steps to ensure the timely availability of an alternative plan to use. He said a special master will be appointed “in short order” to help the court draw a remedial plan, which will be used if the court decides not to give North Carolina officials another chance to redraw the maps or if the maps they draw fail to remedy the constitutional violation.
The case could find its way back before the Supreme Court, which is now split 4-4 along ideological lines following Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement.
The court is on summer recess until the beginning of October, and the Senate’s GOP leadership has indicated that it plans to confirm Brett Kavanaugh, Trump’s nominee to replace Kennedy, before the new session.
Then it will be pronounced fair.
Congressman Watts district was fair?
Damn close now to the Nov election.
When I first read about this, I wondered, “just how much gerrymandering is Constitutional?” Surely no one expects a governing party to draw districts that work against them. I am genuinely curious as to what standards (if any) are being applied. And no, ‘pissing off Liberals’ is not even close to an objective and repeatable standard. We can’t let the minority party have a heckler’s veto.
These partisan courts should be abolished. They are more powerful than the other two branches. It’s time to ignore them. They only rule one way.
Activist judges will make sure all eh districts are Democrat. Thi si show they plan to take the House.
It is only allowed when the Democrats do it.
There is no such thing as a Constitution anymore.
So Democrat gerrymandering Pennsylvania is good. Republicans gerrymandering North Carolina is bad. Heads I win, tales you lose.
And I'd like to give a shout out to the "conservative" Supreme court for their "profiles in courage" by punting for the umpteenth time. What a game plan—NOT.
How is it unconstitutional when Republicans do it but not when DemocRats do it?
“Wynn said legislative defendants drew a plan designed to subordinate the interests of non-Republican voters not because they believe doing so advances any democratic, constitutional, or public interest, but because, as the chief legislative map drawer openly acknowledged, the General Assembly’s Republican majority “thinks electing Republicans is better than electing Democrats.”
Duh, what do you expect? Of course, Republicans think electing Republicans is better than Dems. And I have a hard time believing these judges would be so concerned if the shoe were on the other foot and the Dems were doing the gerrymandering.
Matter of fact, the term 'gerrymandering' was created just a few months ago to give a proper label to this tactic.
All other voting districts are 'completely fair and unpolitical'.
“That is precisely what the Republican-controlled North Carolina General Assembly sought to do here,” he said."
Even if true, so what? To the victors go the spoils - its the way the system works. It was the Dems that drew the obscene districts that the Repubs changed - but then it was OK?
“But that is not a choice the Constitution allows legislative map drawers to make,” he said. “Rather, ‘those who govern should be the last people to help decide who should govern.’”
I must've missed the referenced section of the Constitution. In fact, I seem to recall something about a 10th Amendment? You know: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
There is literally NOTHING in the drawing of the districts that is against the Constitution of the US or NC. These activist judges that govern from the bench are one of the greatest threats to our Republic. They rule with impunity because there is no accountability.
They created their own ghetto districts and now they claim minority districts were forced on them.
You can't win with Democrats. When they lose by their own rules they claim the rules are unfair.
There are actually computer programs that can draw the most compact set of districts based solely on where people live without any regard to their race or political persuasion or anything else, simply upon where people live.
This would be the most honest, unbiased way to do it, so we know it will never happen.
Partisan gerrymandering is required by the Constitution. Since unbiased lines drawn have been decreed to discriminate against minority voters, courts have demanded districts be drawn to enable minorities to be elected.
See #14
Establishing and crafting political subdivisions is an inherent political act and has always been in the province of politicians. It cannot be otherwise. When judges get involved, the responsibility and power to devise congressional districts passes to persons that are not elected: judges, special masters, “non-partisan” panels. The result is invariably a construction that does not represent the will of the people. Rather, you get the will of the elites and these days they are always Democrats.
With today’s computer technology, that’s exactly what should be done. If that happened, there would still be some areas which would lean to one party or the other. But if computer generated, then nobody could complain that a partisan human being drew the district lines.
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.