Gill v Whitford: Supreme Court to hear political gerrymandering case

Gill v Whitford: Supreme Court to hear political gerrymandering case”

The Supreme Court, which now has a 5-4 conservative majority, for decades has been willing to invalidate state electoral maps on the grounds of racial discrimination but never those drawn simply for partisan advantage.

By reimposing the equal population requirement, the high court has already provided an effective limit to partisan benefit from redistricting.

Justice Kennedy is widely expected to cast the deciding vote in a case that could dramatically reduce the Republican Party's advantage in MI and two dozen other states where the GOP controls the process of drawing legislative and congressional boundaries.

There are a variety of challenges to the labor movement and labor unions, among them whether public employees who choose not to join a union have a First Amendment right to avoid paying dues supporting collective bargaining.

Although Kennedy did not tip his hand, he had no questions for a lawyer challenging Wisconsin. Generally, conservative justices aggressively question the liberal challengers and vice versa.

While Kennedy was mostly quiet, his presence loomed over the entire case.

With the new-look Supreme Court beginning its next term today, monumental decisions are looming for Gorsuch and his peers.

WASHINGTON-When a company forces a worker into mandatory arbitration of everything from unsafe working conditions to unpaid overtime, does that trump the worker's rights under federal labor law?

The liberal justices appeared to favor the Democratic voters who challenged the Wisconsin plan.

According to the efficiency gap, Minnesota's current maps have a one-seat Democratic advantage in congressional races and a slight Republican advantage in state House and Senate races, but not almost enough to fall into gerrymandering territory.

This wasn't just a problem in Wisconsin. She continued, "if you can stack a legislature in this way, what incentive is there for a voter to exercise his vote?" The result was that Republicans had a virtual lock on four times as many state legislative and US House seats as Democrats did.

Democrats argue that the wide control of redistricting by Republicans has resulted in Democratic candidates having increased difficulty gaining control of legislative bodies in many states.

Republicans won 60 Indiana House seats in 2010 on maps drawn by Democrats. The Court will be weighing whether those who drew the maps in Wisconsin baked such an extreme partisan advantage that voters' preferences wouldn't matter. "They should be the result of our own insane decisions". The girl's parents filed suit against the Garden City mayor and aldermen seeking damages for what they argued was negligence on the part of the city by allowing the bleachers to fall into a risky condition. Roberts turned down a request for live audio of the argument. Proponents say it could block gerrymandering from the state's redistricting process long into the future.

Courts have struck down districts as racially biased for decades, and other partisan districting lawsuits are moving through the courts in Pennsylvania, Maryland and North Carolina.

So the subtext of the discussion about the NLRB's position seems to me to be that even independent executive branch agencies change their minds when administrations change - a perhaps unremarkable observation except when the Supreme Court is considering how much credence it should place in an agency's legal reasoning. The most extreme manipulations of the map are seen in states such as Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and MI, where single-party control of the redistricting process has allowed the entrench an advantage. His point was that the court could never agree on a workable standard to outlaw gerrymandering.

The need for a costly Supreme Court legal battle could have been avoided if leaders in the Legislature had simply fixed the maps after federal courts ruled them unconstitutional. He proposed a hypothetical standard that would only consider maps drawn when one party has control of state government.

Breyer tried to offer a standard he said he believed could be "manageable".

MICHAEL RUBIN: These employer rules at issue apply to every type of case - discrimination - no less than wage an hour. It happens to be right now that Republicans control way more legislatures. They say their political opponents are clustered in the cities of Milwaukee and Madison, making it impossible to draw maps that would give them an advantage. Justice Sonia Sotomayor said that allowing people to be detained indefinitely was a sign of "lawlessness". "What's really behind all of this?"

At one point, Ginsburg asked, "what's really behind all of this?" and anxious about the "precious right to vote".

Like this