High court case threatens independent electoral map drawers

[DonViejo]

Source: ASSOCIATED PRESS

By MARK SHERMAN
Mar. 1, 2015 8:08 AM EST

WASHINGTON (AP) — In a reversal of the usual worries about political influence on electoral map-making, the Supreme Court is being asked to let raw politics play an even bigger role in the drawing of congressional district boundaries.

The court hears argument Monday in an appeal by Republican lawmakers in Arizona against the state's voter-approved independent redistricting commission for creating the districts of U.S. House members. A decision striking down the commission probably would doom a similar system in neighboring California, and could affect districting commissions in 11 other states.

The court previously has closed the door to lawsuits challenging excessive partisanship in redistricting, or gerrymandering. A gerrymandered district is intentionally drawn, and sometimes oddly shaped, to favor one political party.

Independent commissions such as Arizona's "may be the only meaningful check" left to states that want to foster more competitive elections, reduce political polarization and bring fresh faces into the political process, the Obama administration said.

-snip-

Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/b5cae2175e91459eb359b054480807d3/high-court-case-threatens-independent-electoral-map-drawers#overlay-context=article/258ea19375a04dfe8b8bd1f9ba30d171/widow-murdered-spy-blames-russian-govt-new-killing

[mountain grammy]

1. I'm sure the 5 conservative members of the court will do what's best

for whomever promises them most.

[pinto]

2. I hope they refuse to hear the appeal.

Independent redistricting commissions would be a step to leveling the field and a rational approach to the regular redrawing of state congressional districts.

Some in both the major parties - Rep and Dem - may oppose the change, yet I think it's a good one. Here in CA, we voted for independent commissions.

[former9thward]

3. They accepted the appeal.

Arguments on the case will be heard Monday.

[pinto]

7. Duh. Missed that somehow. Yet, iirc, hearing arguments and taking the case are different, no?

If not and they do rule on the appeal, I hope they uphold the results of the statewide referendum.

[former9thward]

12. No, if they take the case,

which they have, they will hear arguments. They will render a decision probably in June. It takes four justices to take a case and hear arguments.

[pinto]

15. Thanks. I'd forgotten the process.

[jeff47]

9. Mandatory jurisdiction. They can't refuse it. (nt)

[Cosmocat]

4. This more than anything, should be the point where people in this country rise up

This is the most deleterious thing to government that we face in this country, and should piss the hell out of people.

But, outside of some isolated democratic areas, this is mostly something republicans have gamed, as such, IOKIYAAR applies for the talking head/media class, and the people of this country can't be bothered to concern themselves with it.

IF we had straight up districts determined soley on the number of people and general municipal lines, we would have much, MUCH better government.

[Triana]

5. . . .

The Supreme Court’s About To Hear A Case That Could Make Partisan Gerrymandering Even Worse

After a GOP-led attempt to impeach one of Arizona’s chief legislative map drawers failed — former Gov. Jan Brewer (R) complained that the state’s redistricting commission tried to “elevate ‘competitiveness’ over other goals” — the Republican-controlled legislature has turned to one of the GOP’s most powerful allies: the Supreme Court of the United States.

This fight between Arizona Republicans and the state’s redistricting commission is now before the Court in Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, a case the justices will hear on Monday. The GOP-controlled state legislature challenges a 2000 ballot initiative that empowers a redistricting commission — and not the state legislature itself — to draw Arizona’s congressional maps.

This lawsuit follows another attack on the commission by state lawmakers and Brewer. In 2011, Brewer called a special session of the legislature to impeach commission chair Collen Mathis. Although the state senate obliged in this attempt to remove Mathis from office, the state supreme court later reinstated her. Under Arizona law, the commission chair may only be removed for “substantial neglect of duty, gross misconduct in office or inability to discharge the duties of office.”

. . .

The case before the Supreme Court focuses on a provision of the Constitution which provides that “he times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the Legislature thereof.” The state legislature, represented by Republican überlawyer Paul Clement, argues that “Legislature” means the state’s “representative lawmaking body.” So a ballot initiative that bypasses such a body and hands redistricting power to a commission is unconstitutional under this theory.

THE REST OF THE STORY: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/02/27/3627527/supreme-courts-hear-case-make-partisan-gerrymandering-even-worse/

Previously on DU: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026291648

[pinto]

8. Former Gov. Brewer let slip the agenda - “elevate ‘competitiveness’ over other goals”.

[Andy823]

6. There is only one solution

Make sure republicans don't win the WH in 2016, because if they do, well this whole country will be in trouble since new Supreme Court judges would be nominated by a president that would make it an even more right wing court.

[eggplant]

13. 2020 is another key year, as that's when the next census and redistricting happens. n/t

[Phil1934]

10. It is also the GOP's enemy but they don't see it

Gerrymandering makes a red district safe from Democratic challengers but makes it vulnerable for even more right wing, tea party challengers like Ted Cruz. Once in, they are safe, so Boehner has no stick to get them to agree with him and they can propose ridiculous things like shutting down the government or DHS without fear of retribution.

[TinkerTot55]

11. Need to fix your typo:

"High Court threatens....democracy."

There ya go.

[blkmusclmachine]

14. SCOTUS is taking a hard rightwing bend; hence, the new "security" they added. It helps keep the

plebs at bay. How long til the Judges telecommute to the Court, from Cheney's bunker???