In a new decision today, the Supreme Court pretty much put the lie to the endless claims of gerrymandering that the Democrats keep blaming for their losses in various legislatures. In Abbott v. Perez, the Court repeated its prior rulings that someone seeking to overturn districts drawn by the state legislature has the burden of proof to show the wrongful intent of the legislature to draw the lines for racial purposes. The lines drawn by the Texas legislature in 2013 had been challenged as racial gerrymandering, but the lower court had decided the case by requiring the state to show it had no intent to gerrymander. That was wrong according to SCOTUS. Similarly, the Court found that the plaintiffs had not proven (as required) any violation of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
This decision is a rather technical analysis of the whole concept of gerrymandering. The key thing to realize, however, is that SCOTUS has made clear that anyone who challenges districts on this basis will have to prove that there really is a violation. It is not enough to use claims of improper action; there has to be actual proof offered to show that wrongdoing. This will have the effect of ending most of the endless gerrymandering cases brought by the Democrats.
It's worth noting that in the decades beginning in the 1930s until 2010, the state legislatures across the country were controlled by the Democrats for the most part. These legislatures drew district lines to favor -- you guessed it -- the Democrats. Then the Republicans took control in 2010. When the lines were redrawn, they favored -- you guessed it -- the Republicans. It was business as usual, but the Democrats just couldn't accept the idea that they had lost. They instead began to blame gerrymandering. After all, that was the only way that they could accept that a majority of the nation favored the Republicans. It was like blaming non-existent collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign for Hillary's loss, just another excuse. The sad thing, though, is that millions of dollars and countless hours have been wasted fighting about non-existent gerrymandering.
Hopefully, today's ruling by SCOTUS will put this lie to rest once and for all.
This decision is a rather technical analysis of the whole concept of gerrymandering. The key thing to realize, however, is that SCOTUS has made clear that anyone who challenges districts on this basis will have to prove that there really is a violation. It is not enough to use claims of improper action; there has to be actual proof offered to show that wrongdoing. This will have the effect of ending most of the endless gerrymandering cases brought by the Democrats.
It's worth noting that in the decades beginning in the 1930s until 2010, the state legislatures across the country were controlled by the Democrats for the most part. These legislatures drew district lines to favor -- you guessed it -- the Democrats. Then the Republicans took control in 2010. When the lines were redrawn, they favored -- you guessed it -- the Republicans. It was business as usual, but the Democrats just couldn't accept the idea that they had lost. They instead began to blame gerrymandering. After all, that was the only way that they could accept that a majority of the nation favored the Republicans. It was like blaming non-existent collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign for Hillary's loss, just another excuse. The sad thing, though, is that millions of dollars and countless hours have been wasted fighting about non-existent gerrymandering.
Hopefully, today's ruling by SCOTUS will put this lie to rest once and for all.
No comments:
Post a Comment