Federal court rejects GOP-drawn Texas voting maps

Discussion in 'Politics' started by manifold, Aug 29, 2012.

  1. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    49,991
    Thanks Received:
    7,387
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +23,048
    Is this sound judgment or judicial activism? :dunno:
     
  2. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    40,213
    Thanks Received:
    6,098
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +9,764
    Considering when the Democrats do it it is always fine, you answer.
     
  3. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    49,991
    Thanks Received:
    7,387
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +23,048
    Link?
     
  4. Synthaholic
    Offline

    Synthaholic Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010
    Messages:
    36,025
    Thanks Received:
    5,104
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Location:
    Kicking PoliticalChic's ass up & down the forum
    Ratings:
    +9,181
    Stays should have been issued as soon as the case was brought, until there was time to adjudicate it.
     
  5. martybegan
    Offline

    martybegan Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Messages:
    30,974
    Thanks Received:
    4,264
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Ratings:
    +12,538
    I do see it as overreaching, but to be fair, the south brought this upon themselves due to their century long ignoring of the 14th and 15th amendments to the consitution.

    States should have the right to decide how to divide thier districts, with a few simple rules, mostly relating to equality of population, and I would even add certain dimensional requirements, (no snake districts).

    The issue is that both parties will try to thin out voting blocks that vote against them during redistricting, and currently race is the only thing you are not allowed to use (by law). What I find interesting is that the courts will allow districts that create an almost automatic win for a minority group, but will not allow the opposite from happening, which to me goes against the spirit of the amendments.

    Again, the South brought this on themselves, however sooner or later it has to stop paying for its past sins.
     
  6. Inthemiddle
    Offline

    Inthemiddle BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,354
    Thanks Received:
    674
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +674
    On what basis should anyone come to a conclusion of judicial activism?
     
  7. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    49,991
    Thanks Received:
    7,387
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +23,048
    I thought judicial decisions that republicans disagree with are ipso facto activism, no?
     
  8. Star
    Offline

    Star Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    2,522
    Thanks Received:
    606
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Ratings:
    +1,074

    You'll have to show proof of this -- "What I find interesting is that the courts will allow districts that create an almost automatic win for a minority group, but will not allow the opposite from happening," -- happening in other cases, but in the case being discussed, just the opposite is true. 87% of the population growth in Texas is/was minority driven but-------but the 4 new gerrymandered districts were carved out in such a way that 50% of the new districts are mostly white and safely Republican, and the other 50% are overwhelmingly minority.


    In Texas, their recent statewide elections tend to have about a 55% to 45% split, skewed toward Republicans but due to some of the worst cases of gerrymandering in the country, their congressional (9 Democrats, 23 Republicans - 28% Democrat) delegation is not reflective or representative of the 45% Democratic population.


    If this is a case of judicial activism, it's activism by Republican appointed judges -- two of the three judges that voted unanimously to overturn Texas' gerrymandered congressional districts were appointed by George W. Bush.




    How Texas redrew its political boundaries was watched particularly closely after the state was awarded four additional U.S. House seats because of its booming population. The surge has been driven almost entirely by minorities, who account for more than 87 percent of the population growth in Texas over the last 10 years.

    Those congressional seats were split into two safely Republican districts and two safely Democratic ones. Yet in considering the congressional map as a whole, the Washington panel appeared troubled that minority lawmakers who found their former offices and "economic guts," such as stadiums and hospitals, drawn out of their new district.
     
  9. martybegan
    Offline

    martybegan Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Messages:
    30,974
    Thanks Received:
    4,264
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Ratings:
    +12,538
    Shaw v. Reno - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Hunt v. Cromartie - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     
  10. BlindBoo
    Offline

    BlindBoo Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2010
    Messages:
    20,312
    Thanks Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +4,722
    I think the Federal court overturned the Voter ID laws too. The Republican law deemed to unfairly targets Blacks and Hispanics.
     

Share This Page