Supreme Court Backs Most Changes to Texas Congressional Districts
by RonChusidAP reports that the Supreme Court has reached a decision on the Texas redistricting case:
The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld most of the Texas congressional map engineered by former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay but threw out part, saying some of the new boundaries failed to protect minority voting rights.
The fractured decision was a small victory for Democratic and minority groups who accused Republicans of an unconstitutional power grab in drawing boundaries that booted four Democratic incumbents out of office.
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority, said Hispanics do not have a chance to elect a candidate of their choosing under the plan.
Republicans picked up six Texas congressional seats two years ago, and the court’s ruling does not seriously threaten those gains. Lawmakers, however, will have to adjust boundary lines to address the court’s concerns.
At issue was the shifting of 100,000 Hispanics out of a district represented by a Republican incumbent and into a new, oddly shaped district. Foes of the plan had argued that that was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander under the Voting Rights Act, which protects minority voting rights.
On a different issue, the court ruled that state legislators may draw new maps as often as they like — not just once a decade as Texas Democrats claimed. That means Democratic and Republican state lawmakers can push through new maps anytime there is a power shift at a state capital.
So the verdict is in. Redistricting at anytime is ok to screw the other political party, but not to screw minorities. I suspect that this distinction will lead to future legal cases when Congressional districts are redrawn. Republicans might also come to regret this as Democrats control the executive and legislative branches in Illininois, Maine, New Mexico, New Jersey, North Carolina, Louisiana, Washington and West Virginia, and this could be increased by several states in November.
Perhaps the Court is right that they should not interfere with something like this which is handled by the states. Nor should they have interfered with recounts of an election mandated by a state court, such as in Florida.
More information at Bloomberg.com.
Filed under: House Of Reps, In The News | Get Permalink or trackback |
I think a coputer should draw the boundries,making them as compact as possible.Both parties have made most seats non-competitive.
“computer”
Sometimes I think that Tom delay has a photo album full of pictures of the Supreme Court giving blow jobs to all the Republicans in congress and vice versa.
Actually, if you look at the voting patterns in Texas, the new lines produced results that reflected how people actually vote.
The 1991 remap done by the Democrats, and the 2001 remap by the court based upon it, produced a situation in which the state was voting nearly 60% Republican but sending nearly 60% Democrats to Congress. The new map produced results that came close to the way Texans actually vote. Those who believe in democracy should celebrate such a result.
There is some validity to what Rhymes with Right says. It still leaves a couple of questions. Those new lines are sure drawn strangely (although I bet Repubicans can find examples of Democrats doing similar).
The big question was over whether lines could be redrawn without waiting for the census. Democrats questioned the propriety of this, and didn’t do the same in states where they could have after Texas. At least we now have an answer for this. We might regret the new era of redistricting wars, but at least the both parties can now play this under the same rules.
As someone who believes in democracy, there is some justice in Repubicans sending Republicans to Congress proportional to how they vote. Under the same principles of fairness I hope that if a large majority vote for Democrats this fall, the Democrats then can take control of the House. It is also possible that enough Republicans can win by narrow margins, while Democrats win with larger ones, leaving the Republicans in control. Similarly, since a majority already have voted for Democrats for the Senate, I wish the Democrats were in control (The Senate situation is a bit different since small states were intentionally given the same number of states as larger states, currently giving the Republicans an advantage).
But Ron, don’t forget that the 2001 decision by the District COurt urged the legislature to redraw the lines after the 2002 election, as there had never been a map adopted by the legislature in its 2001 session (our legislature meets only once every other yearf from January to June). That often gets overlooked.
Rhymes With Right,
It is certainly not a black or white case. I don’t thnk anyone can deny the partisan nature in which this redistricting was done (although you might counter with less blatant but still partisan redistricting by Democrats).
As the case has been settled by the Supreme Court, I’m now more concerned with the long term ramifications.
I see two obvious ones. It might be common place for states to redistrict every time control of a state government changes hands, further increasing the partisan divide in this country. Then I see frequent legal challenges as it will, at very least, be able to claim racial discrimination whenever minority groups are affected.
Whether or not this is technically the right decision, both parties might ultimately regret this.
[...] anent Link: Supreme Court Backs Most Changes to Texas Congressional Districts” rel=”bookmark” href=”http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=3459″>Supreme Court Backs Most Changes to Texas Congressional Districts Posted by Ron Chusid June 28th, 2006 [...]
This is exactly what I expected to find out after reading the title Supreme Court Backs Most Changes to Texas Congressional Districts. Thanks for informative article