Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan warned that the Supreme Court’s decision in the Texas redistricting case will lead to a “violation of the Constitution” of voter rights.
The Supreme Court issued an unsigned decision in favor of freezing the initial 2-1 U.S. federal court ruling against Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s proposed redistricting map, a stay that could help Republicans pick up five additional U.S. House seats in next year’s midterms.
“This Court’s stay ensures that many Texas citizens, for no good reason, will be placed in electoral districts because of their race,” Kagan wrote in her dissent. “And that result, as this Court has pronounced year in and year out, is a violation of the Constitution.”
Is that what’s called a constitutional crisis?
We did it! 🎉🎉🎉
/s
Is this the same Texas map that was drawn up using voting data based on Trump’s 2024 victory?
Because if so, does it not then have the potential to water down enough districts to make them swing districts, based off of more recent demographic voting trends?
I don’t know enough about polling, statistics and probability to determine if this is a realistic outlook, or just copium.
How poetic would it be if it backfired that way though? We can dream
You pack and you crack.
You either try and pack as many opposition voters into as few districts is possible, or you crack opposition districts and spread their voters to districts you think have enough favorable demographics for you to still win.
But they did all this math based on voter data from the last presidential election, and those demographics have now swung wildly in the other direction, at least according to more recent elections.
So they created a whole bunch of GOP districts that only had a few points of advantage, but that advantage was based off Trump 2024 results.
Is this copium? Maybe, maybe not.
They really did make these decisions based off that voter data, and subsequent election results raise the possibility that they’re really fucking up here, but only time will tell if those trends hold.
Is this copium? Maybe, maybe not.
In a place like Texas… More than likely.
In a state that’s closer to a swing state it’s easier to over do it with gerrymandering and spread out your support too thin. In a state where there’s a lot more support to spread out… Accidentally fucking up is a little more challenging to do.
Plus, I would find it difficult to believe that political operatives wouldn’t be able to grasp the idea that things like the Latino vote from the last election might not be as dependable this year and react accordingly.
does it not then have the potential to water down enough districts to make them swing districts,
That’s how gerrymandering always works…
You want to get every district to where you’d barely win, and jam all the extra people who would vote against you into as few districts as possible that they will definitely win.
The obvious danger is if you gerrymander too much, and a wave shows up, you could potentially lose everything because you no longer have any “safe” districts.
I’ve been saying since the beginning that we’re better off letting them do all this redistricting ASAP, that way we can start the groundwork to win enough of those close districts to take the whole state government
deleted by creator
The Supreme Court is illegitimate
I don’t understand why the liberal justices stay there. It’s clearly a kangaroo court, issuing unsigned rulings that have no basis in law. Sure, if the liberal justices resigned, they’d just get replaced with MAGA flunkies. But that would have no material affect on rulings, and by staying, the liberals are lending the court legitimacy. Take away that fig leaf, and the illegitimacy will be even more obvious than it already is.
Resigning would be counterproductive, short-term and especially in the long-term, but I’d be delighted if one or two sane members of the SC went on strike, by ditching the legal lingo and issuing plain-English dissents.
Because in 5-15 years there’s a sliver chance the court could be Dem majority/normal. If they all resign that goes to 30 to 40 years.
In the absence of a resignation, justices are appointed for life. That is ridiculous. The only way to remove a justice is procedurally impossible or requires violence. Either option means that we’re doomed.
Fuck RBG for not retiring when she should have
In the meantime, they’re lending their good names to prop up an illegitimate court and support the rise of fascism. So, you know, tradeoffs. 🤷
Oh yeah just better hand it over for the next 50 years when no one else cares about their names or blames them if they do. This is peak lemmy.
My point isn’t that they should be concerned about their reputations. Rather, that by staying on the court, they’re lending the legitimacy of their names and reputations to an illegitimate court—thereby helping prop up an authoritarian regime. The sooner people broadly agree that the court is illegitimate, the sooner its power to support the regime crumbles.
No they aren’t lending legitimacy, and no they are not helping prop up, and no its power won’t crumble. And no, they will think about the big picture rather than throwing a tantrum and quitting which won’t accomplish anything. Scratch that, not only will it not accomptlish anything, quitting will set back the country another 50 years. The intelligent thing to do is to stay, for alllll the reasons I have already outlined. I’m just repeating myself and you are not absorbing anything so I’m out.
Bye!
Using the constitution to run a nation of this size is like trying to run a modern data center with punch cards.
It needs to go because it’s not effective in curbing abuses, like this ruling shows.
It’s not the Constitution that’s the problem, the problem is the court that deliberately misinterprets it in the Republicans’ favor.
So what happens after getting rid of the constitution?
I don’t know because clearly there can never be another one
