The current term of the Supreme Court ends in two weeks. That means that most or all of the pending cases will be decided this week or next. The big two subjects pending before the Court are the composition of the 2020 Census and the proper scope of review of claims of Gerrymandering of legislative districts. There are also a bunch of other cases that could have big impacts.
The Census question is simple: should the government be allowed to ask respondents in 2020 if they are citizens of the USA. Because there is no question that such a question could be asked, the focus of the case before the Court is whether or not the Secretary of Commerce followed the correct procedures in deciding to add this question. It seems pretty clear that both sides expect the Court to allow the question to be asked. Indeed, those fighting against the question have tried to delay the decision by claiming that they found "new" evidence that has to be added to the record. Even the trial judge who sided with these people, however, called the supposed "new" evidence secondary at best. There's unlikely to be a delay. Remember, the citizenship question was part of every census from 1820 to 2000. Don't be surprised when it is approved.
The case regarding legislative districts centers on claims of partisan Gerrymandering. Can a state legislature draw district lines to favor one party over another? If so, are there limits on that practice? How does the Voting Rights Act which requires that districts be drawn so that there are "minority-majority" districts, that is districts in which minority voters constitute the majority, affect all this? The Supreme Court could decide that setting legislative districts is a political decision which is left to the states absent a federal law on point (which regard to congressional districts.) The Court could also go the other way and rule that anything more than a minor amount of political considerations in the districts is too much. The real problem for the Court is that there's no easy way to set a standard for this sort of issue. It cannot be that every ten years when districts are redefined after the census a court will have to rule on the propriety of the new districts. If there are to be limits set, those limits have to be clear and capable of being applied by the legislature. The Supreme Court will not want to undertake the role of being the constant arbiter of redistricting propriety.
The Census question is simple: should the government be allowed to ask respondents in 2020 if they are citizens of the USA. Because there is no question that such a question could be asked, the focus of the case before the Court is whether or not the Secretary of Commerce followed the correct procedures in deciding to add this question. It seems pretty clear that both sides expect the Court to allow the question to be asked. Indeed, those fighting against the question have tried to delay the decision by claiming that they found "new" evidence that has to be added to the record. Even the trial judge who sided with these people, however, called the supposed "new" evidence secondary at best. There's unlikely to be a delay. Remember, the citizenship question was part of every census from 1820 to 2000. Don't be surprised when it is approved.
The case regarding legislative districts centers on claims of partisan Gerrymandering. Can a state legislature draw district lines to favor one party over another? If so, are there limits on that practice? How does the Voting Rights Act which requires that districts be drawn so that there are "minority-majority" districts, that is districts in which minority voters constitute the majority, affect all this? The Supreme Court could decide that setting legislative districts is a political decision which is left to the states absent a federal law on point (which regard to congressional districts.) The Court could also go the other way and rule that anything more than a minor amount of political considerations in the districts is too much. The real problem for the Court is that there's no easy way to set a standard for this sort of issue. It cannot be that every ten years when districts are redefined after the census a court will have to rule on the propriety of the new districts. If there are to be limits set, those limits have to be clear and capable of being applied by the legislature. The Supreme Court will not want to undertake the role of being the constant arbiter of redistricting propriety.
No comments:
Post a Comment