dagblog - Comments for "Supreme Court to hear landmark gerrymandering case"

Case was a bi-partisan effort

artappraiser — Wed, 21 Jun 2017 05:56:49 +0000

In reply to Supreme Court to hear landmark gerrymandering case

Case was a bi-partisan effort:

We led the Wisconsin Senate. Now we’re fighting gerrymandering in our state.

By Tim Cullen and Dale Schultz, guest op-ed @ WashingtonPost.com, June 20

Tim Cullen is a former Democratic majority leader of the Wisconsin Senate. Dale Schultz is a former Republican majority leader of the Wisconsin Senate. They are co-chairs of the Fair Elections Project, which helped organize the Gill v. Whitford litigation.

As politicians from different parties, we disagree a lot. We vote for different candidates for president, we have very different views on taxes, and we disagree strongly on abortion.

But some things we agree on: We both love our home state, Wisconsin, where we have had long careers in public service, including having led our state Senate. And we’re both deeply concerned that the political system in Wisconsin — as in so much of the country — is broken.

Nothing epitomizes the problem more than the extreme partisan gerrymandering that has taken hold in Wisconsin and other states, where politicians and special interests have rigged the system, manipulating voting maps to keep their own political party in power with little regard for the will of the voters.

That’s why we are supporting the lawsuit from Wisconsin the Supreme Court just agreed to hear that would limit gerrymandering no matter which party does it. In our view — as the old saying goes — absolute power corrupts absolutely. Fighting gerrymandering is about fighting abuse of power, no matter who does it [....]

Arta's rule # 1 in voting for

artappraiser — Mon, 19 Jun 2017 17:42:13 +0000

In reply to This decision could turn out

Arta's rule # 1 in voting for president: his/her ability to appoint Supreme Court justices trumps (no pun intended) every other issue he/she has power to affect, including war.

It could and with a majority

HSG — Mon, 19 Jun 2017 17:34:45 +0000

In reply to This decision could turn out

It could and with a majority of Republican-appointed justices there is reason for fear. But, I have a measure of cautious optimism because Clarence Thomas joined the Democratic Justices earlier this year to reverse North Carolina's racist districting scheme.

This decision could turn out

Michael Wolraich — Mon, 19 Jun 2017 16:04:00 +0000

In reply to Supreme Court to hear landmark gerrymandering case

This decision could turn out to be the cruelest consequence of the Garland-Gorsuch atrocity.

Supreme Court to Hear Major

artappraiser — Mon, 19 Jun 2017 15:44:48 +0000

In reply to Supreme Court to hear landmark gerrymandering case

Supreme Court to Hear Major Case on Partisan Districts

By ADAM LIPTAK @ NYTimes.com, 9:55 AM ET

The court announced that it would consider whether partisan gerrymandering can violate the Constitution, a case that could reshape American politics.