Court throws out NC Congressional map again
Source: WRAL
Posted 10 minutes ago
Updated 9 minutes ago
By Travis Fain
A panel of three federal judges has ordered the state to redraw its Congressional map again, forbidding North Carolina from holding this year's scheduled U.S. House elections until it does so.
In doing so the court ruled that state legislators, seeking to address a racial gerrymander the court complained about with a previous map, put too much partisan intent into their redraw, unfairly seeking to lock in Republican gains and violating people's right to choose their own representatives.
The court not only ordered the General Assembly to redraw districts, it said it would also appoint a special master to draw maps on a parallel track. With filing slated for February, time is of the essence, the court said.
In the decision, authored by 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge James Wynn, the court pointed to baldly partisan public statements by GOP mapmakers intent, at the time, on proving to the court and others that they had set aside racial data in redrawing the districts.
Read more: http://www.wral.com/court-throws-out-nc-congressional-map-again/17245449/
leftieNanner
(15,206 posts)is trying to pack the courts with right wing judges so that they will rule the way the GOP wants. Just today he was out bitching about the "obstruction" in confirming judges. Really??? I have two words for you Mitch. Merrick. and Garland.
BigmanPigman
(51,667 posts)BumRushDaShow
(130,043 posts)thanks to Obama and Harry Reid pushing to get nominees through.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/barack-obama-judicial-legacy_us_586c1944e4b0de3a08f9eb1f
a kennedy
(29,779 posts)leftieNanner
(15,206 posts)Anything positive in my little heart certainly helps these days.
NewJeffCT
(56,829 posts)when Trump took office. The senate has fast tracked appointing new judges since Trump took office as well.
BumRushDaShow
(130,043 posts)but if you recall in the news, a bunch were found to be completely unqualified (and withdrew and/or were not blue-slipped or confirmed) and it seems many have been at the lower court level, which probably where most of the vacancies are. Their big prize was at the SCOTUS level with Gorsuch.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)I guarantee most of them have substantial criminal history. That's one of his main criteria for selecting them.
bluestarone
(17,128 posts)will be a must
clementine613
(561 posts)No exceptions. Lock them all up.
BumRushDaShow
(130,043 posts)Some decisions will be happening within the next couple weeks here.
turbinetree
(24,745 posts)paleotn
(18,015 posts)Good news.
FakeNoose
(32,917 posts)We've got some seriously gerrymandered districts in PA. The courts are dragging their feet on giving a ruling because they don't want to change the maps before the 2018 election. The GOP will cheat anyway they can. Always assume they're cheating because it's the only way they can win.
Congratulations to the NC Democrats, you've won an important victory!
JohnnyRingo
(18,696 posts)This is why congressional districts look like pieces in a bizzaro puzzle. Near me, it explains why solid blue Youngstown is represented by republican snake Bill Johnson.
[img][/img]
packman
(16,296 posts)NewJeffCT
(56,829 posts)even if the Republics won all 3 swing districts, it would still be a net pickup of 2 seats for the Democrats. However, if we do get a blue wave, it could be a 5 seat pickup with all 3 swing districts.
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Great! So often courts only require compliance some time after the next election.
Btw, let's not forget, we have that major SCOTUS decision written but not yet issued on Wisconsin gerrymandering, Gill v. Whitford, and the question of violation of the equal protection clause.
Plus, SCOTUS will also be hearing a second case regarding gerrymandering in Maryland, Benisek v. Lamone: WaPo:
The plaintiffs, Republican voters who live in the district, claim the legislature and then-Gov. Martin OMalley, a Democrat, targeted them for vote dilution because of their past support for Republican candidates for public office, violating the First Amendment retaliation doctrine, lawyer Michael B. Kimberly wrote in his petition to the court. ...
A three-judge panel ruled against the challengers in August. In a 2-to-1 vote, the panel said the Republican challengers didnt prove the election results occurred just because of those redistricting changes. ...
If a court were to find that a state did impose burdens and restrictions on groups or persons by reason of their views, there would likely be a First Amendment violation, Kennedy wrote.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/2017/12/08/4fde65f4-dc66-11e7-b1a8-62589434a581_story.html?utm_term=.fdd409da9323
It's actually had to imagine how gerrymandering to disadvantage voters wouldn't impose burdens. We all know it's rampant.