A Mixed Decision
UPDATED: To include link to Supreme Court's decision...
The ruling from the Supremes is in... Read the actual decision here.
Via AP: Court Nixes Part of Texas Political Map
Does that mean that members of Congress are elected to serve the interests of a particular race -- or for all the citizens of a district?!? Arrggh!
But, the decision isn't all bad... (You know the one about blind squirrels and nuts, right? The one about stopped clocks? You get the point.) After all, it did say this:
The technical legalese is summed up by Justice Kennedy thusly: (via SCOTUSBlog)
It may not be good news for Congressman Henry Bonilla, but it's good news for Texas Republicans.
The ruling from the Supremes is in... Read the actual decision here.
Via AP: Court Nixes Part of Texas Political Map
"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."Yeah, this is the kind of race-based politics that really chaps my hide... you know, when you read stuff like this:
"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."Uh, I'm sorry, Mister Justice, but where in the US Constitution does it say that a racial group is entitled to "elect a candidate of their choosing"?!? Does that mean that the Blacks, Asians, Native Americans, etc. get their own representatives as well?
Does that mean that members of Congress are elected to serve the interests of a particular race -- or for all the citizens of a district?!? Arrggh!
But, the decision isn't all bad... (You know the one about blind squirrels and nuts, right? The one about stopped clocks? You get the point.) After all, it did say this:
"...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."That might bring some nasty fallout to the GOP in some areas of the country, but it's good for Texas (at least for the near future). The bottom line of this, though, was that they ruled that the recent redrawing of the boundaries in Texas was acceptable, vindicating Republican claims to that fact. It only disagreed with how some of those boundaries were drawn.
The technical legalese is summed up by Justice Kennedy thusly: (via SCOTUSBlog)
"In sum, we disagree with appellants' view that a legislature's decision to override a valid, court-drawn plan mid-decade is sufficiently suspect to give shape to a reliable standard for identifying unconstiutitonal political gerrymanders. We conclude that appellants have established no legally impermissible use of political classifications. For this reason, they state no claim on which relief may be granted for their statewide challenge."Read some soon-to-be great commentary on the decision (which the bloggers there have not posted on yet, but will soon) at National Review's Bench Memos.
It may not be good news for Congressman Henry Bonilla, but it's good news for Texas Republicans.
2 Comments:
Apparently, Justice Kennedy relied on the Voting Rights Act for his approach.
Congressional Republicans could render it all moot by refusing to renew that act, but I don't hold out much hope of that.
Rest assured that the spectre of racial politics will render the spines of the GOP leadership in Congress into jello -- you can be certain that the VRA will be renewed in due course.
Post a Comment
<< Home