U.S. Supreme Court: Post-Nino Edition

More important.

If Kavanaugh hired an all-female group of law clerks, why wouldn't RBG approve of that, even if it was done for motives that have more to do with Kavanaugh openly preening himself on his liberality and open-mindedness than the actual presence of liberality or open-mindedness in his judicial thinking? At least those women have been given a chance to actively demonstrate their ability.

*future alien historians* "it's a little weird but very human. these x-x females wrote tons of pieces for this x-y male boss, named ka-va-nah, in support of overturning that "Roe" opinion. and later, in recognition of fetal personhood."

🐦[How will the RBG cult deal? https://t.co/CdFEIpaXYy🕸
— Doug Henwood (@DougHenwood) June 9, 2019🕸]🐦

#Morbsbait

He hired Tiger's Mom's daughter too. Tiger Mom defending him pays off.

these people are going to kill us

Good news:

Finally: A 5–4 decision ruling that the Virginia House lacks standing to defend its racial gerrymander in court. That effectively means its gerrymander is toast.

Majority: Ginsburg, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan, Thomas, and Gorsuch. Fun!https://t.co/7iA2rRb24r

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) June 17, 2019

Check out who joined the majority!

gorsuch seems like more of an ideologue, like thomas, than apparatchik, like alito/kavanaugh

https://i.imgur.com/OG8GqtO.gif?noredirect

do we know why breyer didn't vote in the majority?

the alliances among the justices seem odd in this case but maybe that is because it is largely a process decision about standing rather than about gerrymandering itself. apparently it is the first incarnation of this particular line-up

according to Adam Feldman

Yes, it's about standing. This means, though, that the lower court's decision will hold.

so, a good outcome!

Good outcome for VA, don't think it has implications for gerrymander in other states.

Breaking Coverage Updated 06/27/2019 14:16 GMT
Supreme Court

The Supreme Court says federal courts have no role to play in policing political districts drawn for partisan gain.
Location: Washington, DC, USA

christ

it's cool, james madison would have wanted it this way

The drafters of the Constitution, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority, understood that politics would play a role in drawing election districts when they gave the task to state legislatures. Judges, the chief justice said, are not entitled to second-guess lawmakers’ judgments.

“We conclude that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts,” the chief justice wrote.

Judges/justices second guess lawmakers' judgments all the time.

#SCOTUS is living in a straight up fantasy land where there's a difference between racial and partisan gerrymanders pic.twitter.com/mMrAmu7RsT

— Robinson Woodward-Burns (@rwbdc) June 27, 2019

I might have to unbookmark this thread for the next 20 years for my sanity

we need a fuckin general strike in this country right now

fuck, I know I'm not breaking any news here but if the Dems don't win the Senate then winning the presidency is almost useless. if they can take both then yeah, they absolutely have to pack the everloving fuck out of the Court.

And also abduct Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh first

I am livid

There should be demonstrations at every courthouse all over the nation. Anger at the court system, the Roberts court, should be a loud part of the left wing anger. Imo.

meanwhile:

Wow: #SCOTUS, in an opinion by Roberts, says the Trump administration's stated reason for adding a citizenship question to the 2010 "seems to have been contrived." The court stops just short of accusing the administration of lying. pic.twitter.com/5r6MZnvaGd

— Brad Heath (@bradheath) June 27, 2019

Re the census case: I guess the Court was offended by how brazen the GOP was; next time, the GOP will just burn every document.

So: Roberts blinked on the census question case b/c he doesn't want two bombshell decisions favoring his side out on the same morning.

roberts taking this swing vote role to heart!!!!

Not surprised: it’s open season on gerrymandering; say goodbye to your blue swing states.

Dems reaction will be to clutch pearls rather rather than gerrymander states they currently control into permanent majorities.

otm:

Wow: #SCOTUS, in an opinion by Roberts, says the Trump administration's stated reason for adding a citizenship question to the 2010 "seems to have been contrived." The court stops just short of accusing the administration of lying. pic.twitter.com/5r6MZnvaGd

— Brad Heath (@bradheath) June 27, 2019

oops:

This seems like the same “unring the bell” logic of the Muslim ban decision. “Come back and lie to us about your motives more convincingly, please.” https://t.co/LjgGeyc6Xx

— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) June 27, 2019

NC is lost. The hope of turning any red states purple is gone.

haha yes yes everything’s workin

Going to love being at the whims of an ever-shrinking white supremacist/ apologists minority until I’m dead

so the SC's decision overturns the previous decisions in pennsylvania, virginia, etc?

if only it was ever-shrinking

lol fair. they do seem to have a Quiverfull.

I think NC & GA will drift more blue population wise as time goes on

Roberts the Umpire.

Haven’t read the decision but I assume PA will stand because it was decided under the state, not the federal, constitution. Not sure about VA.

I think NC & GA will drift more blue population wise as time goes on

It largely won’t matter after the R majorities are locked in. Dems may be able to win statewide elections (Gov, Senators), but good luck in the House and state legislatures.

I don't feel as bleak as that. There are mathematical limits on gerrymandering -- eventually the dam bursts. Also statewide officials and courts will have some power to mitigate the damage, and states can still outlaw this in their own constitutions, which are not as hard to amend as the federal one.

The Virginia decision is not affected by this ruling fyi

first of all, this decision doesn't impact racial gerrymandering, which is what VA was about. Second, that decision was on procedural grounds, because what actually happened was that VA was forced to redraw maps and then half of the VA state legislature tried to sue to stop the redrawing, and SCOTUS said, nope, you can't have one house of the legislature maintain a suit on behalf of the entire state.

Which points to the fact that another way to get around today's SCOTUS ruling is to just dig deeper in order to connect the partisan gerrymandering to racial motivations. Which shouldn't be that hard in places like Georgia.

that still buys the GOP at least another decade, assuming you'd have to go state-by-state to "prove" that each gerrymander is racially motivated.