As I posted last night:
When the California case reaches the Supreme Court, Alito will note “that the impetus for the adoption map was racial advantage pure and simple.” Strike one.
And it was approved by the voters, not by the independent state legislature. Strike two.
And it’s too close to the election, regardless of when the DoJ appeal gets there. Strike three.
“They” are not saying that at all. Only Alito.
We need new swear words for these corrupt Supreme Court fuckers.
Yeah. These type of rulings & blatant partisanship has me wondering why there is a SCOTUS.
I’m ready to banish the SCOTUS. The next choice is what happened to CK.
Shussssssh.
It seems to me that the Supremes are worried about their own futures on the court. They don’t want the Dems in control because the Dems could work to replace them. This needs to become a campaign issue. The Court needs to be on the citizen’s docket.
Apportionment as an implement of democratic process has been corrupted by SCOTUS’s opportunistic and malign response to the obvious fact that there no such thing as “perfect” apportionment. Because there is no Platonic standard for it the court seems to think that no standard of any kind for the result is legitimate. Yes, the current holding is that apportionment cannot be done on the basis of race, but there are many indications that this court will eventually find this limitation to be impermissible. Here the perfect is not just the enemy of the good; it is the friend of the worst.
He happily owns it, lol. Only Dems are constrained by outdated protocol, laws, fear and history. lol.
First we need a Dem leader with balls, guts, and vertebrae. The last Dem meeting that description was in a wheelchair. All we have today is a bunch of cowards who have sold out to billionaires for scraps.
Three questions:
How does a theory without supportive law and congressional affirmation become valid law? Wasn’t that identified as the problem when CO tried to enforce the 14th Amdt, Sec. 3 in the 2024 election cycle?
And what of Ethics_Gradient’s point “* That’s of course disregarding that most normal 10-year redistricting occurs less than 11 months before an election.”
I tend to agree with you. SCOTUS is out of whack with America and is egregiously activistic at this point. The Conservative side of the court is mad with power, but also trying to cover up that Roberts and Alito are in the Epstein files, while Kavanaugh is a drunk serial abuser, Gorsuch pretty much hates everything, and ACB is just tra-la-la’ing through the court like a dutiful little, conservative Christian woman. These people are not representative of America today. Not even close. In fact, they seem to hate America and to be intent on letting DJT destroy it. It’s just a wow moment in American history that will look worse and worse and worse as time goes on.
Awaiting the Supreme Court to rule that the Texas redistricting is legal and the California redistricting not.
Who can expect anything else?
We now have an Extreme Court. There is nothing supreme about it, other than its corruption.
Fully expect they’ll take up a challenge to one of the responsive Blue state gerrymanders and hold the exact opposite.
What is time, really? Let us consider: Merrick Garland, Amy Coney Barret, Mitch McConnell. There are New York minutes, there may be Texas minutes. Time may speed up and slow down, relativity. The Court must consider all factors in making a decision.
Ha-Ha, Plunkitt of Tammany Hall, “ Yuh seez yuz opportunities and yuz takes em.”
Because it’s nominally based on the text of the Constitution.
Remember, nobody except Alito went for the too-close rationale. But the Texas filing deadline for next year’s primaries is next week.
The judicial version of The Human Centipede?!?!
What part of “My legal reasoning is ‘This is the result I want’” do you not understand?
If they don’t openly provide another justification different with the one opinion in the majority, I’m counting them in agreement with it. No benefit of the doubt at this point.
Corruption 101. SC shows us how to.