SCOTUS denies PA Republican appeal: Redistricting

[Buddha Dharma]

Washington (CNN)The Supreme Court has denied a request from Pennsylvania Republicans to block new congressional maps that could tilt several key races in Democrats' favor from being used in the midterm elections.

The court issued one sentence to reject the request. There were no noted dissents.

GOP leaders of the state House and Senate asked the court for an emergency stay blocking the implementation of the maps, which were unveiled last month by the state Supreme Court after it ruled that the previous maps had been gerrymandered in violation of Pennsylvania's Constitution.

Source: SCOTUS rejects GOP plea to block Pennsylvania maps - CNNPolitics

Do you think the ruling was fair? Do you buy the claim that districts have been unfairly gerrymandered in several states? Was this ruling appropriate? Was it out of bounds? Explain.

 

[shunyadragon]

The worst state gerrymandered is North Carolina with districts looking like spiders and caterpillars.

 

[Stevicus]

Source: SCOTUS rejects GOP plea to block Pennsylvania maps - CNNPolitics

Do you think the ruling was fair? Do you buy the claim that districts have been unfairly gerrymandered in several states? Was this ruling appropriate? Was it out of bounds? Explain.

I don't know how it is in Pennsylvania, but I would agree that gerrymandering tends to get out of hand in some states.

I have to admit that I chuckled at the headline regarding the "GOP plea to block Pennsylvania maps." The way it's phrased, it sounds like they want to block Pennsylvania from the map. Either that, or they want to outlaw maps of Pennsylvania.

I can't say if the Supreme Court's ruling was appropriate, although they can rule however they want. Perhaps they felt they had more important things to do than settle the political squabbling between Democrats and Republicans who can't seem to compromise or come to terms on how they gerrymander congressional districts.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Good! We need actual redistricting, not heavily lopsided gerrymandering.

 

[sun rise]

I wish other states would adopt the California plan. We're far from perfect, but on this one point ahead of most.

 

[metis]

Yep, the party that referred to itself as being the "party of law and order" is heavy into gerrymandering and voter suppression with Trump as their leader. Whatta trifecta that is.

 

[pearl]

gerrymandered

Both parties benefit from gerrymandering, and should not be allowed. Some people are working behind the scenes to bring an end to it, maybe we're seeing some of the results with the Court's decision. President Obama and I believe Eric Holder and others are organizing an attempt to end the practice. Much the same thing with the filibuster, those who hold congressional power tempted to do away with it, but stop short knowing they may wind up on the other side at any time.

I wish other states would adopt the California plan. We're far from perfect, but on this one point ahead of most.

What is the California plan?

 

[Augustus]

Do you buy the claim that districts have been unfairly gerrymandered in several states? Was this ruling appropriate? Was it out of bounds? Explain.

I still find it hard to believe that it was possible in the first place.

I suppose that's a peril of the 2 party system where everything is reduced to a zero-sum game, reforms usually require one side to accept 'losing' some form of advantage.

 

[columbus]

What is the California plan?

I would be interested in this also.

Indiana looks redder than it really is. A big part of the reason that our legislature is so dominated by Republicans is the heavy gerrymandering. A more objective way of drawing maps would better reflect the political reality of "The People", which is not the Christian, Conservative, Republican (in that order) of Mike Pence.
Tom

 

[sun rise]

Some details from Wikipedia California Citizens Redistricting Commission - Wikipedia Another feature is a "top 2" plan where the two people who get the most votes in the primary face off in the general election. So if two Republicans get the most votes, they run against each other which has resulted in some interesting match ups. Personally I like how it works since it forces everyone to cooperate and results in saner and more competitive election maps.

The California Citizens Redistricting Commission is the redistricting organization for the state of California. It is responsible for determining the boundaries for the Senate, Assembly, and Board of Equalization districts in the state. The 14-member commission consists of five Democrats, five Republicans, and four commissioners from neither major party.
...
The Commission certified new electoral district maps by the August 15, 2011 deadline with the required “supermajority” of a minimum of three Democrats, three Republicans, and three commissioners from neither major party, as stipulated by Article XXI sections 2(c) and 2(g) of the California Constitution. Maps for the state legislative districts passed with a 13-1 vote, and for Congressional districts with a 12-2 vote.[
...
While the long-term results will bear out over time, independent studies by the Public Policy Institute of California, the National Journal, and Ballotpedia have shown that California now has some of the most competitive districts in the nation, creating opportunities for new elected officials

 

[metis]

I just signed a petition this morning to try and end the gerrymandering here in Michigan that the Republicans put into place so as to have it on this November's ballot. We have some districts here that look like an octopus on LSD.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

I still find it hard to believe that it was possible in the first place.

I suppose that's a peril of the 2 party system where everything is reduced to a zero-sum game, reforms usually require one side to accept 'losing' some form of advantage.

That is a fair point. Believe me, I'm not thrilled about our two party system myself. I wish the Socialist Party USA had a snowball's chance in Tartarus of winning anything. I used to be Green, but then the party did things I couldn't agree with, so I switched back to Democrat.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

The worst state gerrymandered is North Carolina with districts looking like spiders and caterpillars.

Somehow I do not doubt that, and wasn't the NC redistricting blocked?

 

[Buddha Dharma]

A big part of the reason that our legislature is so dominated by Republicans is the heavy gerrymandering. A more objective way of drawing maps would better reflect the political reality of "The People", which is not the Christian, Conservative, Republican (in that order) of Mike Pence.

Well you know something isn't right with our electoral process when the religious right keeps getting victories it shouldn't get. I'd say gerrymandering plays a big part in it.

What I mean by knowing something is wrong, is America is no longer so Evangelical or Republican. I look at Pew statistics quite a bit, and the number of Americans that identify as right-leaning and Christian continue to drop. Therefore, something is really off about our system that keeps the far-right winning elections. Our government does not represent most of it's people.

The only way to know what kind of role gerrymandering may play here is to redistrict and see if the outcome is any different. I suspect gerrymandering has a more significant impact on our elections than people realize, because where the religious right does continue to persist more or less the same is in rural pockets of the states.

It does not persist in suburban communities, but drawing the districts just right could tip the scales in favor of Republicans. That seems to be what happens.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well you know something isn't right with our electoral process when the religious right keeps getting victories it shouldn't get. I'd say gerrymandering plays a big part in it.

What I mean by knowing something is wrong, is America is no longer so Evangelical or Republican. I look at Pew statistics quite a bit, and the number of Americans that identify as right-leaning and Christian continue to drop. Therefore, something is really off about our system that keeps the far-right winning elections. Our government does not represent most of it's people.

The only way to know what kind of role gerrymandering may play here is to redistrict and see if the outcome is any different. I suspect gerrymandering has a more significant impact on our elections than people realize, because where the religious right does continue to persist more or less the same is in rural pockets of the states.

It does not persist in suburban communities, but drawing the districts just right could tip the scales in favor of Republicans. That seems to be what happens.

That is a problem with Gerrymandering. It drives a party to its extremes. There is going to be a heavy price paid by the Republicans come November. And it looks like they may drive the country to the left. In 2020 another census and that will result in redistricting again. Odds are they will not be in power at that time and they may very well be the ones complaining about gerrymandering.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

That is a problem with Gerrymandering. It drives a party to its extremes. There is going to be a heavy price paid by the Republicans come November. And it looks like they may drive the country to the left. In 2020 another census and that will result in redistricting again. Odds are they will not be in power at that time and they may very well be the ones complaining about gerrymandering.

The country is already more left than the government would lead outsiders to believe. Most Americans, including young conservatives that identify as Libertarian- just so happen to be social liberals.

 

[shunyadragon]

Somehow I do not doubt that, and wasn't the NC redistricting blocked?

It still remains unresolved and in the courts again.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

It still remains unresolved and in the courts again.

Well here's hoping NC gets it sorted out. The last several elections suggest that the people of NC aren't actually having their voices heard- since even with the state as gerrymandered as it is, Democrats keep getting good numbers.

 

[Nous]

In a variety of ways, it would have been an extraordinary intrusion into state constitutional issues for the US Supreme Court to have blocked the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's order in this matter. In fact, it's somewhat alarming that anyone would have even sought such a stay from the federal court.

The PA Court found that the redistricting map that the state legislature drew in 2011 defies the traditional criteria for district drawing, namely the criteria of compactness, contiguity and respect for the integrity of political subdivisions, and thereby violates the Free and Equal Elections Clause of Article I Section 5 of the state Constitution. Expert witnesses for plaintiffs showed, and the Court agreed, that many of the districts have unusually low compactness scores; several of the districts are contiguous only by virtue of a single building, and various municipalities and communities were split, sometimes into multiple different districts, for no discernible reason other than in an effort of partisan gerrymandering.

This case is entirely unlike the challenged Wisconsin redistricting plan that is the subject of Gill v. Whitford, which the US Supreme Court will review later this term. Most notably, the Wisconsin districts apparently do not defy traditional districting criteria, and the plan is being challenged primarily on a proportionality measurement, termed the Efficiency Gap (EG), where the proportion of Democrat vs. Republican voters did not elect a similar proportion of Democrat vs. Republican representatives. From the beginning of partisan gerrymandering challenges, the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that such (dis)proportion does not amount to unconstitutional gerrymandering. Additionally, there are multiple questions as to whether the EG is even an appropriate method to measure such disproportion, and other such issues. For instance, the EG is a statewide (not district-specific) measurement, thus cannot show that any particular district was gerrymandered. Election results can have an EG far from zero (proportion) even for district maps that were drawn with overtly non-partisan intent. Districting plans can flip signs (from positive to negative) from election to election during the lifetime of the plan. And the EG treats votes for an unopposed candidate as “wasted” votes, thus suggesting favoritism toward the other party, which is illogical.

I briefly discussed the issue of partisan gerrymandering in an OP last year: How Can One Determine an Instance of Partisan Gerrymandering? Regardless of how common and constitutionally offensive partisan gerrymandering is, it isn't an easy issue for a court to discern. Indeed, this is exactly why to date the Supreme Court has found that it is unable to articulate a judicially manageable standard for determining when district map-drawing is a case of unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I briefly discussed the issue of partisan gerrymandering in an OP last year: How Can One Determine an Instance of Partisan Gerrymandering? Regardless of how common and constitutionally offensive partisan gerrymandering is, it isn't an easy issue for a court to discern. Indeed, this is exactly why to date the Supreme Court has found that it is unable to articulate a judicially manageable standard for determining when district map-drawing is a case of unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering.

Personally, I think we should just do away with congressional districts as we know them and install a system of proportionate representation. It may even help boost voter turnout if people know that at least at some level they have representation.