See my above post. There’s another decision pending, I think North Carolina, which would be very favorable for Republicans with a 5-4 win. Punting on the Democratic-friendly one in VA allows them to rule in favor of the Republicans in North Carolina without the same accusations of being nakedly partisan.
ETA: We’ll see whether that prediction holds up within the next two weeks.
“WTF”.
as a not-an-attorney, that was my considered opinion too. as, i am sure you noticed, this was a procedural decision and did not get into the actual merits of the gerrymandering issue. seems like nitpicking over substance to me. i wonder how the vote would have broken down if gerrymandering was actually addressed? 5-4? but maybe a different 5-4?
You might want to check your numbers and update the last sentence that says the Republicans have a 51-96 majority in the House of Delegates.
Yep, it’s calling throwing us a bone.
Based on your avatar, it was the right call…
While the VA decision might end up being a double edged sword for Dems if this standing issue is used against them in other cases, the reaffirmation of dual sovereignty will help the Dems and hurt Trump and his associates personally.
NYS can prosecute Manafort for the same crimes that the Feds prosecuted him on. A pardon has no value for him. Manhattan DA is already prosecuting Manafort for additional crimes. That might actually get him to cough up evidence that he denied Mueller in exchange for a shorter sentence. An impeachment proceeding might change Manafort’s political calculus as he might think Trump too weak and undependable to stay in jail for. Problem for Manafort is that his credibility is shot but perhaps he has stashes and docs he can offer.
This will also factor into the Trump family’s thinking on tax and financial fraud claims. If Dems ever get the political will to open a formal impeachment inquiry, you could see a flood of action in the courts as it becomes open season on anything Trump.
Any attorney should be embarrassed that judges are so ideological. We civilians wonder what is taught in law school.
Don’t give them any ideas…
Or this nugget…
“the justices have likely tilted the 2019 elections in Democrats’ favor”
WTF is that?
Um, more like “took the racist Republican thumb off the scale for the 2019 elections”
I’d say let’s be happy with this ruling and not project what terrible rulings will be in the future. We have to celebrate any small victory at this stage of our corrupt government.
My instant reaction too. Momentarily thought it was still Sunday… 
On the contrary, I don’t think this shows anything at all about how they would vote on the merits of a gerrymandering case (I expect it would be along traditional liberal-conservative lines, but who knows). I’m glad the maps will stay so I’ll take it, but I really don’t like the decision. Any participant in a case should be able to continue to appeal it, and the frequent dismissals based on standing really bother me because they usually end up preventing any kind of justice. The constitutionality of any law should be able to be challenged even if no one is directly affected by it.
Republicans currently hold a 51-96 majority in the chamber.
I think you meant 51-49.
No, the Justices haven’t “tilted the 2019 elections in Democrats’ favor”. They have allowed a fair election to continue, because the current map is fair, not favoring either side. In a state with something like a 10% majority for Democrats, a map tilted to the Democrats would have almost no Republicans elected.
I agree, they only ruled the way they did, due to standing.
IT’s still a good ruling.
And the standing issue has the potential to stop other frivolous right-wing lawsuits.
Yes, people shouldn’t let their imaginations go too wild here. The Supreme Court is an incredibly powerful institution. If it makes too many decisions that are too damaging to other institutions, it could find itself without any foundation supporting its own power.
Weirdest 5-4 split I’ve ever seen or heard of. Naturally it was on a fairly technical issue, but nonetheless . . .
I think it just means they all were rabbit-pathing on a technical issue where pedantry crushed ideology. Usually only see it in I.P. cases and rarely then because they tend not to take I.P. cases without a larger majority determined to smack down an uppity court of appeals that’s usually the Federal Circuit.
“According to one analysis of the new map, six House of Delegates districts held by Republicans could be shifted towards Democrats. Republicans currently hold a 51-96 majority in the chamber.”
That should read “51-49 majority.”
Just a typo, but one that significantly distorts the impact this decision is likely to have on control of the chamber.