Supreme Court blocks redrawing of Republican-held congressional district in New York over liberal dissent

[1srelluc]

MSN

The US Supreme Court on Monday approved an emergency appeal from a Republican congresswoman in New York who asked the justices to block a state court ruling that ordered her Staten Island-based district to be redrawn ahead of the midterm election.

The high court’s three liberal justices dissented from the decision.

The court’s short order did not explain its reasoning, but Justice Samuel Alito, a conservative, said that a state court order requiring the map to be redrawn “blatantly discriminates on the basis of race.”

Requiring the new map, he wrote, was “unadorned racial discrimination, an inherently ‘odious’ activity that violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause except in the ‘most extraordinary case.’”

CNN sounds sad.

Hopefully it serves as a shot across the bow for dems wishing to gerrymander due to ethnicity.

 

[JGalt]

MSN

The US Supreme Court on Monday approved an emergency appeal from a Republican congresswoman in New York who asked the justices to block a state court ruling that ordered her Staten Island-based district to be redrawn ahead of the midterm election.

The high court’s three liberal justices dissented from the decision.

The court’s short order did not explain its reasoning, but Justice Samuel Alito, a conservative, said that a state court order requiring the map to be redrawn “blatantly discriminates on the basis of race.”

Requiring the new map, he wrote, was “unadorned racial discrimination, an inherently ‘odious’ activity that violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause except in the ‘most extraordinary case.’”

CNN sounds sad.

Hopefully it serves as a shot across the bow for dems wishing to gerrymander due to ethnicity.

About time those shitheads got something right.

 

[toobfreak]

The high court’s three liberal justices dissented from the decision.

Of course. Then the SCOTUS is a joke if decisions are always made on political rather than legal grounds.

Republican justices often vote conservative but might go either way, but democrat justices ALWAYS vote progressive.

That means that even the SC is more political than legal.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

MSN

The US Supreme Court on Monday approved an emergency appeal from a Republican congresswoman in New York who asked the justices to block a state court ruling that ordered her Staten Island-based district to be redrawn ahead of the midterm election.

The high court’s three liberal justices dissented from the decision.

The court’s short order did not explain its reasoning, but Justice Samuel Alito, a conservative, said that a state court order requiring the map to be redrawn “blatantly discriminates on the basis of race.”

Requiring the new map, he wrote, was “unadorned racial discrimination, an inherently ‘odious’ activity that violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause except in the ‘most extraordinary case.’”

CNN sounds sad.

Hopefully it serves as a shot across the bow for dems wishing to gerrymander due to ethnicity.

I just love their contradiction in the same sentence. There is no reason given, but here is the reason.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

That attempt was very transparent. We need federal guidelines drawn up to prevent gerrymandering. It's gotten so out of hand that most people no longer have a choice as to who "represents" them in the House.

 

[1srelluc]

That attempt was very transparent. We need federal guidelines drawn up to prevent gerrymandering. It's gotten so out of hand that most people no longer have a choice as to who "represents" them in the House.

Tyson picked ours.