Pennsylvania court issues new congressional district map for 2018 elections; WOW!? The lines, DANG!

[CrusaderFrank]

Pennsylvania court issues new congressional district map for 2018 elections; map almost certain to face GOP challenge

NOW! 2018

Pa. Supreme Court unveils new congressional map

Before map.

DANG!....

Why is the judicial system involved in politics?

Why do you say it's politics?

Congressional districts is not a political issue?

Are you trolling or just a moron?

She's a lawyer

 

[Weatherman2020]

Pennsylvania court issues new congressional district map for 2018 elections; map almost certain to face GOP challenge

NOW! 2018

Pa. Supreme Court unveils new congressional map

Before map.

DANG!....

Why is the judicial system involved in politics?

Why do you say it's politics?

Congressional districts is not a political issue?

Are you trolling or just a moron?

She's a lawyer

And I'm a brain surgeon.

 

[tigerred59]

Pennsylvania court issues new congressional district map for 2018 elections; map almost certain to face GOP challenge

NOW! 2018

Pa. Supreme Court unveils new congressional map

Before map.

DANG!....

Why is the judicial system involved in politics?

Because you cheating mf's need to learn how to win election on merit.

 

[Syriusly]

Why is the judicial system involved in politics?

Not politics- elections.

The State Supreme Court was enforcing the State Constitution.

Why are you against State's rights?

Not politics, elections?
Again, why has the judicial system inserted itself into politics?

Where these always go to settle Dem vs DOPer thangs.
Do you recall the GOP SCOTUS win for Dubya?
btw:
"""""The Democratic-majority state Supreme Court ruled last month in a party-line decision that the district boundaries unconstitutionally put partisan interests above neutral line-drawing criteria, such as keeping districts compact and eliminating municipal and county divisions.
The decision is the first time a state court threw out congressional boundaries in a partisan gerrymandering case and handed a victory to the group of registered Democratic voters who sued last June in a lawsuit backed by the League of Women Voters."""""

Sorry, I don't remember the SCOTUS doing anything but interpreting laws, not creating political seats for any particular political party.

Republicans have already signaled they will likely file a federal lawsuit challenging the state Supreme Court’s map. They argue that only lawmakers and the governor can draw congressional lines, not courts. The lawmakers made a similar argument in a request to the U.S. Supreme Court, but the argument was rejected by Justice Samuel Alito.

Certainly the GOP can try- but since this is a matter of an interpretation of the State Constitution, I think the Supreme Court will follow Justice Alito's lead.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Pennsylvania court issues new congressional district map for 2018 elections; map almost certain to face GOP challenge

NOW! 2018

Pa. Supreme Court unveils new congressional map

Before map.

DANG!....

Why is the judicial system involved in politics?

Because you cheating mf's need to learn how to win election on merit.

 

[Syriusly]

Pennsylvania court issues new congressional district map for 2018 elections; map almost certain to face GOP challenge

NOW! 2018

Pa. Supreme Court unveils new congressional map

Before map.

DANG!....

Why is the judicial system involved in politics?

Not politics- elections.

The State Supreme Court was enforcing the State Constitution.

Why are you against State's rights?

Not politics, elections?
Again, why has the judicial system inserted itself into politics?

Where these always go to settle Dem vs DOPer thangs.
Do you recall the GOP SCOTUS win for Dubya?
btw:
"""""The Democratic-majority state Supreme Court ruled last month in a party-line decision that the district boundaries unconstitutionally put partisan interests above neutral line-drawing criteria, such as keeping districts compact and eliminating municipal and county divisions.
The decision is the first time a state court threw out congressional boundaries in a partisan gerrymandering case and handed a victory to the group of registered Democratic voters who sued last June in a lawsuit backed by the League of Women Voters."""""

Sorry, I don't remember the SCOTUS doing anything but interpreting laws, not creating political seats for any particular political party.

Nor is the Pennsylvania Supreme court doing anything but interpreting the Penn Constitution. It isn't creating political seats for any particular party.

Which is why the GOP is so pissed off.

 

[Lakhota]

Republicans have enjoyed a considerable advantage under the earlier map, which was in place for three congressional elections.

Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court on Monday issued a new congressional map to replace the state’s current one, which the court said is so partisan it violates the state’s Constitution.

The Supreme Court drew the map after Republican lawmakers and Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf (D) failed to come up with an agreement by the Feb. 15 deadline.

In a Monday order, the court wrote that its new map splits just 13 counties. (The earlier plan, devised in 2011, split 28.)

More: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Issues New Congressional Map To Replace Gerrymandered One

Great news! It's about time! Gerrymandering is evil - regardless of which party does it.

 

[Syriusly]

Not politics- elections.

The State Supreme Court was enforcing the State Constitution.

Why are you against State's rights?

What does this have to do with state's rights? I have a lot of friends in PA who have been discussing this issue on social media and what they are saying is that the court illegally seized power by doing this, that redistricting lies solely with the legislature and the state SCOTUS has no right to intervene. I'm obviously no expert on Pennsylvania law, but if that is true then it is very concerning that the judicial branch is attempting a major power grab. It also needs to be pointed out that this decision was handed down by a 5-4 vote, in which the five justices in the majority are Democrats, so it has the appearance of being very partisan decision.

That said, I do like the new map. Gerrymandering needs to stop altogether, but we cannot allow the courts to engage in judicial fiat.

Where in the Pennsylvania Constitution does it say that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court doesn't interpret the Pennsylvania Constitution?

I will put this another way- how has the Pennyslvania Supreme Court violated the Penn Constitution in this action?

Regarding the 'appearance of being a very partisan decision'.....well the Supreme Court didn't let that stop them in the Gore decision.

If the actions of the Penn Supreme Court violate the Penn Constitution- well they can be removed.

 

[tigerred59]

Pennsylvania court issues new congressional district map for 2018 elections; map almost certain to face GOP challenge

NOW! 2018

Pa. Supreme Court unveils new congressional map

Before map.

DANG!....

Why is the judicial system involved in politics?

Why do you say it's politics?

Congressional districts is not a political issue?

Are you trolling or just a moron?

She's a lawyer

And I'm a brain surgeon.

And you are a brain surgeon.....and you did a wonderful job with Trump. Just one question, what did you do with his brain?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Not politics- elections.

The State Supreme Court was enforcing the State Constitution.

Why are you against State's rights?

What does this have to do with state's rights? I have a lot of friends in PA who have been discussing this issue on social media and what they are saying is that the court illegally seized power by doing this, that redistricting lies solely with the legislature and the state SCOTUS has no right to intervene. I'm obviously no expert on Pennsylvania law, but if that is true then it is very concerning that the judicial branch is attempting a major power grab. It also needs to be pointed out that this decision was handed down by a 5-4 vote, in which the five justices in the majority are Democrats, so it has the appearance of being very partisan decision.

That said, I do like the new map. Gerrymandering needs to stop altogether, but we cannot allow the courts to engage in judicial fiat.

Where in the Pennsylvania Constitution does it say that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court doesn't interpret the Pennsylvania Constitution?

I will put this another way- how has the Pennyslvania Supreme Court violated the Penn Constitution in this action?

Regarding the 'appearance of being a very partisan decision'.....well the Supreme Court didn't let that stop them in the Gore decision.

If the actions of the Penn Supreme Court violate the Penn Constitution- well they can be removed.

As I said, I'm not an expert on the PA Constitution. I'm just telling you what I've been reading from a lot of other people and what several state legislators have claimed, including the Senate President. Also, there is a difference between interpreting the Constitution and changing it to the way you want it to be.

 

[hazlnut]

Pennsylvania court issues new congressional district map for 2018 elections; map almost certain to face GOP challenge

NOW! 2018

Pa. Supreme Court unveils new congressional map

Before map.

DANG!....

Why is the judicial system involved in politics?

Our government is divided into three branches, check and balances...

If you think the Judges map is political, then prove it..

Or shut your stupid ass.

 

[hazlnut]

Pennsylvania court issues new congressional district map for 2018 elections; map almost certain to face GOP challenge

NOW! 2018

Pa. Supreme Court unveils new congressional map

Before map.

DANG!....

Why is the judicial system involved in politics?

Why do you say it's politics?

Congressional districts is not a political issue?

Are you trolling or just a moron?

Prove the new map is in any partisan or favoring one party.

Prove it.

Or STFU.

 

[Syriusly]

Not politics- elections.

The State Supreme Court was enforcing the State Constitution.

Why are you against State's rights?

What does this have to do with state's rights? I have a lot of friends in PA who have been discussing this issue on social media and what they are saying is that the court illegally seized power by doing this, that redistricting lies solely with the legislature and the state SCOTUS has no right to intervene. I'm obviously no expert on Pennsylvania law, but if that is true then it is very concerning that the judicial branch is attempting a major power grab. It also needs to be pointed out that this decision was handed down by a 5-4 vote, in which the five justices in the majority are Democrats, so it has the appearance of being very partisan decision.

That said, I do like the new map. Gerrymandering needs to stop altogether, but we cannot allow the courts to engage in judicial fiat.

Where in the Pennsylvania Constitution does it say that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court doesn't interpret the Pennsylvania Constitution?

I will put this another way- how has the Pennyslvania Supreme Court violated the Penn Constitution in this action?

Regarding the 'appearance of being a very partisan decision'.....well the Supreme Court didn't let that stop them in the Gore decision.

If the actions of the Penn Supreme Court violate the Penn Constitution- well they can be removed.

As I said, I'm not an expert on the PA Constitution. I'm just telling you what I've been reading from a lot of other people and what several state legislators have claimed, including the Senate President. Also, there is a difference between interpreting the Constitution and changing it to the way you want it to be.

Is it really any surprise that the State GOP leadership doesn't agree with this? Really?

And clearly the Penn Supreme Court doesn't believe it is changing the Constitution at all.

Here is what I will say though- IF the GOP believes this is an unjust ursurption of State legislators authority- they can pass a Constitutional amendment to specifically prevent the Penn Supreme Court from undoing their politically motivated gerrymandering.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Whether PA or MD or any state, redistricting should be done by legislatively authorized non-partisan committees.

 

[Dekster]

Pennsylvania court issues new congressional district map for 2018 elections; map almost certain to face GOP challenge

NOW! 2018

Pa. Supreme Court unveils new congressional map

Before map.

DANG!....

I don't see how this is remotely constitutional.

 

[Pogo]

Pennsylvania court issues new congressional district map for 2018 elections; map almost certain to face GOP challenge

NOW! 2018

Pa. Supreme Court unveils new congressional map

Before map.

DANG!....

Why is the judicial system involved in politics?

Why are political parties involved in drawing districts?

 

[Pogo]

Not politics- elections.

The State Supreme Court was enforcing the State Constitution.

Why are you against State's rights?

What does this have to do with state's rights? I have a lot of friends in PA who have been discussing this issue on social media and what they are saying is that the court illegally seized power by doing this, that redistricting lies solely with the legislature and the state SCOTUS has no right to intervene. I'm obviously no expert on Pennsylvania law, but if that is true then it is very concerning that the judicial branch is attempting a major power grab. It also needs to be pointed out that this decision was handed down by a 5-4 vote, in which the five justices in the majority are Democrats, so it has the appearance of being very partisan decision.

That said, I do like the new map. Gerrymandering needs to stop altogether, but we cannot allow the courts to engage in judicial fiat.

Where in the Pennsylvania Constitution does it say that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court doesn't interpret the Pennsylvania Constitution?

I will put this another way- how has the Pennyslvania Supreme Court violated the Penn Constitution in this action?

Regarding the 'appearance of being a very partisan decision'.....well the Supreme Court didn't let that stop them in the Gore decision.

If the actions of the Penn Supreme Court violate the Penn Constitution- well they can be removed.

As I said, I'm not an expert on the PA Constitution. I'm just telling you what I've been reading from a lot of other people and what several state legislators have claimed, including the Senate President. Also, there is a difference between interpreting the Constitution and changing it to the way you want it to be.

There's also a difference between saying "Judge X is a member of party Y" and saying "Judge X is partisan".
You made a leap there that is not in evidence. These are judges, not politicians.

 

[Syriusly]

Pennsylvania court issues new congressional district map for 2018 elections; map almost certain to face GOP challenge

NOW! 2018

Pa. Supreme Court unveils new congressional map

Before map.

DANG!....

I don't see how this is remotely constitutional.

How exactly- and based upon which Constitution?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Not politics- elections.

The State Supreme Court was enforcing the State Constitution.

Why are you against State's rights?

What does this have to do with state's rights? I have a lot of friends in PA who have been discussing this issue on social media and what they are saying is that the court illegally seized power by doing this, that redistricting lies solely with the legislature and the state SCOTUS has no right to intervene. I'm obviously no expert on Pennsylvania law, but if that is true then it is very concerning that the judicial branch is attempting a major power grab. It also needs to be pointed out that this decision was handed down by a 5-4 vote, in which the five justices in the majority are Democrats, so it has the appearance of being very partisan decision.

That said, I do like the new map. Gerrymandering needs to stop altogether, but we cannot allow the courts to engage in judicial fiat.

Where in the Pennsylvania Constitution does it say that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court doesn't interpret the Pennsylvania Constitution?

I will put this another way- how has the Pennyslvania Supreme Court violated the Penn Constitution in this action?

Regarding the 'appearance of being a very partisan decision'.....well the Supreme Court didn't let that stop them in the Gore decision.

If the actions of the Penn Supreme Court violate the Penn Constitution- well they can be removed.

As I said, I'm not an expert on the PA Constitution. I'm just telling you what I've been reading from a lot of other people and what several state legislators have claimed, including the Senate President. Also, there is a difference between interpreting the Constitution and changing it to the way you want it to be.

There's also a difference between saying "Judge X is a member of party Y" and saying "Judge X is partisan".
You made a leap there that is not in evidence. These are judges, not politicians.

If you seriously believe that judges are unbiased I have a bridge I would like to sell you

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Not politics- elections.

The State Supreme Court was enforcing the State Constitution.

Why are you against State's rights?

What does this have to do with state's rights? I have a lot of friends in PA who have been discussing this issue on social media and what they are saying is that the court illegally seized power by doing this, that redistricting lies solely with the legislature and the state SCOTUS has no right to intervene. I'm obviously no expert on Pennsylvania law, but if that is true then it is very concerning that the judicial branch is attempting a major power grab. It also needs to be pointed out that this decision was handed down by a 5-4 vote, in which the five justices in the majority are Democrats, so it has the appearance of being very partisan decision.

That said, I do like the new map. Gerrymandering needs to stop altogether, but we cannot allow the courts to engage in judicial fiat.

Where in the Pennsylvania Constitution does it say that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court doesn't interpret the Pennsylvania Constitution?

I will put this another way- how has the Pennyslvania Supreme Court violated the Penn Constitution in this action?

Regarding the 'appearance of being a very partisan decision'.....well the Supreme Court didn't let that stop them in the Gore decision.

If the actions of the Penn Supreme Court violate the Penn Constitution- well they can be removed.

As I said, I'm not an expert on the PA Constitution. I'm just telling you what I've been reading from a lot of other people and what several state legislators have claimed, including the Senate President. Also, there is a difference between interpreting the Constitution and changing it to the way you want it to be.

There's also a difference between saying "Judge X is a member of party Y" and saying "Judge X is partisan".
You made a leap there that is not in evidence. These are judges, not politicians.

If you seriously believe that judges are unbiased I have a bridge I would like to sell you

Exactly, any lawyer will tell you they can be biased