[RD] Death to the Gerrymander

[Zkribbler]

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court struck down that state's gerrymandered congressional districts as violating Democrats' equal protection and freedom of expression rights under the state's Constitution. It has given the legislature until Feb. 8 to redraw the map.

A similar case is pending before the US Supreme Court.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/pennsylvania-gerrymandering-court_us_5a662f2ee4b0022830057349

 

[civvver]

Michigan is trying to get signatures on a petition right now to get something on a ballot that establishes an independent council to draw the districts essentially ending party based gerrymandering.

Our districts have consistently gotten more weirdly shaped over the years and republicans have gained more seats as a result.

Then:

Spoiler :

Now:

Spoiler :

They basically drew lines around detroit and ann arbor so all the suburbs could have republican reps. That's why 12 and 8 look funky.

 

[Perfection]

On the subject of Gerrymandering, let me recommend 538's exceptionally good podcast series:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/tag/the-gerrymandering-project/

Typically I wouldn't suggest that people sink the ~4 hours needed to listen to a series, but given how good it is, and how impactful redistricting is in American democracy it's vital listening.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I don't think the supreme court will make any meaningful changes. They've already set the bar extraordinarily low - a party only has to show they gerrymandered for partisan advantage and that's it. Given that, it's very hard to prove that one party is deliberately trying to disenfranchise minorities (which is about the line SCOTUS draws on what's legal) rather than just disenfranchising the other party.

I expect ultimately that the supreme court will overturn the recent lower court rulings on gerrymandering and return everything to the status quo.

Meanwhile the GOP is underfunding and meddling with the census bureau as the natural next step to gerrymandering every district they can.

 

[metalhead]

There is really no reason they can't require a good faith effort at eliminating partisan advantage in district drawing, on the simple grounds that drawing districts for partisan political reasons is anti-democratic.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

There is really no reason they can't require a good faith effort at eliminating partisan advantage in district drawing, on the simple grounds that drawing districts for partisan political reasons is anti-democratic.

No reason except the fact that SCOTUS established the constitutionality of partisan gerrymandering. Either get that overturned of change the constitution.

 

[Zkribbler]

I don't think the supreme court will make any meaningful changes.

This ruling was by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court interpreting Pennsylvania law. The US Supreme Court cannot get involved here.

If you're talking about the case pending before the USSC, you may be right.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

The case pending will allow them to overturn state laws and state Court ruling on the matter. Or at least I think

 

[uppi]

Michigan is trying to get signatures on a petition right now to get something on a ballot that establishes an independent council to draw the districts essentially ending party based gerrymandering.

Our districts have consistently gotten more weirdly shaped over the years and republicans have gained more seats as a result.

They basically drew lines around detroit and ann arbor so all the suburbs could have republican reps. That's why 12 and 8 look funky.

They look funky alright, but 11 takes the cake.

 

[Evie]

Hobbsyoyo - I don't *think* so. My understanding is that the current case pertain to whether a gerrymander violates the US constitution ; the Pennsylvania case pertain to whether it violate the Pennsylvania constitution. They're answering two entirely different legal questions, so one cannot directly void the other.

The SC might try it anyway, but they'd have to play very fast and loose with the rules, or twist the Pennsylvania decision to claim it was really a federal constitutional case.

 

[Ajidica]

Michigan is trying to get signatures on a petition right now to get something on a ballot that establishes an independent council to draw the districts essentially ending party based gerrymandering.

Our districts have consistently gotten more weirdly shaped over the years and republicans have gained more seats as a result.

A friend of mine is leading the ballot initiative and I have heard more than I ever want to hear about Michigan gerrymandering.

 

[Perfection]

No reason except the fact that SCOTUS established the constitutionality of partisan gerrymandering. Either get that overturned of change the constitution.

SCOTUS has never really established that partisan gerrymandering is constitutionally acceptable. The main case on the matter is Vieth v. Jubelirer. It was decided that because there wasn't a clear standard to determine if partisan gerrymandering has occurred that you couldn't pass judgement on it. It is important to note that the decision was 5-4 in favor of not having courts intervene with partisan gerrymanders, with swing-voting Kennedy in a separate concurrence expressly noting that he doesn't preclude the possibility of someone being able to create a standard.

In Gill. vs. Whitford (which was argued October 2017 and is expected to be ruled on by June 2018), the plaintiffs are attempting to swing Kennedy in favor of intervention by providing manageable standards to determine if Gerrymandering has occurred based on a metric known as the Efficiency gap

(All this is in the podcast series I linked above, specifically the Wisconsin one)

 

[stinkubus]

The situation in PA in bananas aorn. The electorate is split more or less evenly between Republicans and Democrats, but our congressional delegation and state house are absolutely dominated by Republicans.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

SCOTUS has never really established that partisan gerrymandering is constitutionally acceptable. The main case on the matter is Vieth v. Jubelirer. It was decided that because there wasn't a clear standard to determine if partisan gerrymandering has occurred that you couldn't pass judgement on it. It is important to note that the decision was 5-4 in favor of not having courts intervene with partisan gerrymanders, with swing-voting Kennedy in a separate concurrence expressly noting that he doesn't preclude the possibility of someone being able to create a standard.

In Gill. vs. Whitford (which was argued October 2017 and is expected to be ruled on by June 2018), the plaintiffs are attempting to swing Kennedy in favor of intervention by providing manageable standards to determine if Gerrymandering has occurred based on a metric known as the Efficiency gap

(All this is in the podcast series I linked above, specifically the Wisconsin one)

Is the case they are ruling on the one with the notorious 'scientific gobbledygook' line of argument?

 

[Perfection]

Is the case they are ruling on the one with the notorious 'scientific gobbledygook' line of argument?

"sociological gobbledygook" actually, but yeah. Makes me real secure in the mental prowess of our Chief Justice.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Yeah it was pretty clear that not only did he not understand the science but he was outright disparaging of it and unwilling to try to learn.

 

[Berzerker]

The Dems (and maybe the rest of us who aren't Trumpets) should be thankful Trump beat Hillary... The new census year approaches and we need a GOP collapse of biblical proportions within the states for redistricting.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

The Dems (and maybe the rest of us who aren't Trumpets) should be thankful Trump beat Hillary... The new census year approaches and we need a GOP collapse of biblical proportions within the states for redistricting.

I'm too lazy to link but the GOP is starving the census bureau of funds and passing laws to interfere with how it collects data. The intent is to purposefully under report certain populations in order to prevent more districts being shifted from red states to blue. As long as they can get away with tactics like this and gerrymandering, they can keep their electoral prospects alive in the face of unfavorable demographic shifts.

 

[metalhead]

The Dems (and maybe the rest of us who aren't Trumpets) should be thankful Trump beat Hillary... The new census year approaches and we need a GOP collapse of biblical proportions within the states for redistricting.

Or, you know, a Hillary SCOTUS justice could have banded together with Ginsburg et al. and ended partisan gerrymandering once and for all, but whatever man. Your way is totally better and is obviously way more effective and certain and doesn't come with any obvious downsides that I can see

 

[Berzerker]

I forgot, the Dems dont gerrymander