01-04-2019, 07:05 PM
A Supreme Court ruling declaring that the district mapping in one or both of the specific cases at hand was unconstitutional would set a precedent for all states.
That, to me, wouldn't be as ideal as legislation preventing gerrymandering in the first place. But, it would at least allow the disadvantaged party an opportunity to challenge the constitutionality of unfair redistricting in the courts and hopefully reduce the number of 'wasted votes'.
Snip:
The Supreme Court will take up unresolved constitutional questions about partisan gerrymandering, agreeing Friday to consider rulings from two lower courts that found congressional maps in North Carolina and Maryland so extreme that they violated the rights of voters.
The North Carolina map was drawn by Republicans, the Maryland districts by the state’s dominant Democrats.
The Supreme Court passed up the chance last term to settle the issue of whether courts have a role in policing partisan gerrymandering (now, they're taking it on).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/...f6eb2039fb
That, to me, wouldn't be as ideal as legislation preventing gerrymandering in the first place. But, it would at least allow the disadvantaged party an opportunity to challenge the constitutionality of unfair redistricting in the courts and hopefully reduce the number of 'wasted votes'.
Snip:
The Supreme Court will take up unresolved constitutional questions about partisan gerrymandering, agreeing Friday to consider rulings from two lower courts that found congressional maps in North Carolina and Maryland so extreme that they violated the rights of voters.
The North Carolina map was drawn by Republicans, the Maryland districts by the state’s dominant Democrats.
The Supreme Court passed up the chance last term to settle the issue of whether courts have a role in policing partisan gerrymandering (now, they're taking it on).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/...f6eb2039fb