Morning Digest: Supreme Court hears argument in case that could end 'one person, one vote' rule
They are considering not allowing representation for all US citizens. Only a select minority will be allowed to vote and have representation in congress. I kid you not.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that, if successful, would overturn the concept of "one person, one vote" and dramatically alter how congressional and legislative districts are drawn. The plaintiffs in Evenwel vs. Abbott are arguing that map-makers should only count eligible voters rather than all residents when crafting election districts, which would reduce the political power of areas with large concentrations of non-citizens, children, and prisoners. Naturally, this would undermine Democrats and bolster Republicans, so unsurprisingly, the court's conservative majority seemed to give the idea some real purchase.
Of course, we won't know how the justices actually feel until they issue a final ruling, which won't be for several months. Los Angeles Times reporter David Savage said that the court "seemed poised" to side with the plaintiffs, but election law expert Rick Hasen (also writing in the Times) concluded that it "seems doubtful" the court would adopt the "eligible voter" standard, largely because we simply don't even know how many eligible voters there are in the country. (The Census doesn't collect this information, and other sources are fraught with problems.)
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2015/12/10/1458664/-Morning-Digest-Supreme-Court-hears-argument-in-case-that-could-end-one-person-one-vote-rule
= new reply since forum marked as read
