The Supreme Court Refuses To Reinstate A Racially Gerrymandered Virginia Map by Ari Berman for Mother Jones
Join the 173,128 people who've taken action on Countable this week
by BriteHeart | 6.18.19
The Supreme Court on Monday threw out a challenge to Virginia’s state legislative maps, keeping in place a new map that boosts Democratic chances of retaking the Virginia House of Representatives in 2019.
In a short 5-4 decision, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote that Virginia’s Republican-controlled House did not have the authority to appeal a lower-court ruling that 11 state legislative districts were racially gerrymandered by Republicans and needed to be redrawn. Neither the state senate nor the Virginia attorney general joined the appeal, making it invalid, the justices found. “One House of its bicameral legislature cannot alone continue the litigation against the will of its partners in the legislative process,” Ginsburg wrote. In a strange bedfellow lineup, Ginsburg was joined in the majority by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch. Justice Samuel Alito dissented, joined by John Roberts, Stephen Breyer, and Brett Kavanaugh.
In 2018, a three-judge federal district court in Virginia ruled that Republicans illegally concentrated black voters into a small number of predominately African American districts in order to make the surrounding districts whiter and more favorable to Republicans. “Race predominated over traditional districting factors,” the majority ruled.
The court ordered a nonpartisan redistricting expert to draw new districts for 2019 legislative elections, which one analysis found could shift six seats to the Democrats. Democrats are currently only one seat away from taking control of the state house and senate, which would give them control over the redistricting process in 2021, when new lines are drawn.
Republicans in the Virginia House hired Thomas Hofeller, the Republican gerrymandering mastermind who was a key figure behind the Trump administration’s decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census, to defend their maps, but the federal court disagreed with his conclusions.
Because this case was decided on technical grounds, it may not shed any light on the other high-profile voting cases before the Supreme Court, as the justices weigh the fate of partisan gerrymandering and the census citizenship question.
*This post has been corrected to note which justices joined the majority opinion
The Brennan Center For Justice 2019 Voting Laws Roundup by the Brennan Center For JusticeAt this point in the year, 42 state legislatures have concluded their last regular legislative session in the leadup to a
by BriteHeart | 7.11.19
Political Leanings Can’t Be Reduced To Genetic Programming by Jonah Goldberg for The National ReviewIncreasingly, the intellectual consensus seems to be that our political leanings are hardwired in our genes. There is some
by BriteHeart | 7.10.19
Margaret Renkl Weaves Personal And Natural History In ‘Late Migrations’ by Beth Ann Fennelly for The Nashville SceneThere must have come a moment, somewhere during the writing of Late Migrations: A Natural History of Love and Loss, in which
by BriteHeart | 7.9.19