Pa. Supreme Court considers ordering new congressional map before 2018 elections
Source: Philly.com
HARRISBURG Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices on Wednesday interrogated lawyers defending the way the states congressional districts were drawn, a map opponents have challenged as illegally shaped to benefit Republicans, who hold a majority of its seats in the U.S. House.
Based on the tenor of their questions, a majority of the court, which has five Democrats and two Republicans, appeared open to the argument that Pennsylvanias congressional districts are unfairly gerrymandered. A group of Democratic voters has asked the court to overturn the map and order a new one drawn before the 2018 elections, in one of several such lawsuits nationwide. And yet the justices, while acknowledging that politics played a role in the boundary-drawing, must decide whether those political concerns crossed the line and deprived Democratic voters of their constitutional rights.
A test has, I think, eluded every court that has tried to grapple with this, Justice Max Baer, who ran as Democrat, said at one point during the two-and-a-half hour hearing. Over and over, justices asked attorneys for both the 18 Democratic voters who brought the suit and the leaders of the Republican-controlled legislature what the test should be.
Whatever the courts decision, it could have implications for this years midterm elections, when forecasts indicate Democrats have an outside chance of retaking the U.S. House. The justices are expected to rule within the next few weeks.
Read more: http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/state/pa-gerrymandering-republicans-partisan-fair-elections-20180117.html
As a note, this is the parallel case that is in the PA state court and the arguments were before the PA State Supreme Court. An earlier case that ran in the federal court a little over a week ago resulted in a panel of federal judges (not en banc however) at the appellate court (3rd district) upholding the gerrymandered map with the argument that they didn't feel it met the test for application of the Elections Clause. There are plans to appeal to the U.S. SCOTUS where other cases (notably the Wisconsin one) are pending.
SeaDoo77
(540 posts)Dems get more votes and GOP gets 9 out of 13 seats.
Some folks are getting tired of being screwed out of their democracy.
BumRushDaShow
(129,459 posts)despite the fact that Democratic party registration outnumbers GOP registration by ~800,000. Just based on registration alone, the distribution should be 10 Dem & 8 GOPers.
BigmanPigman
(51,627 posts)One week they vote to allow gerrymandering, then the next week they make a decision that seems to take the opposite decision. What is going on? Are these two separate cases and courts?
BumRushDaShow
(129,459 posts)The case from earlier in the month was the federal appeals court where it was argued that the gerrymandering violated the U.S. Constitution. That appellate court didn't think the arguments showed how it did and how one could tell it did. I.e., at what point might one decide how far political line drawing would have to go before it would be egregious enough to be a violation?
The case today was before the state Supreme Court arguing that the gerrymandering violated the state Constitution.
I expect that if the state SCOTUS declares that the gerrymandering is illegal based on the state Constitution, the GOP will probably try to take it back to the federal courts who might say they don't have jurisdiction based on the state Constitution unless they can argue that redrawing would violate the U.S. Constitution.
BigmanPigman
(51,627 posts)Thanks for explaining it. All of this is like Greek to me. I used to live in PA and saw a map of the Phila gerrymandered areas and almost choked. I sent it to my mom (she lives in CA now too) and she couldn't get over it! What a joke.
BumRushDaShow
(129,459 posts)That was once Joe Sestak's seat and is now the one that gets showcased as one of the worst in the nation (goes through 5 counties).
I think parts are only 800 ft wide. They drew districts so that they went around big cities to capture more rural red areas and then split other smaller cities to dilute them with other rural areas and then concentrated a couple districts in the urban areas of Philly and Pittsburgh.
BigmanPigman
(51,627 posts)always going on and on about the educated, upper middle class blue voters (particularly women) in the suburbs in Mont. County and outside of the city limits. That view is no longer valid it seems.
BumRushDaShow
(129,459 posts)Notably Montgomery County, which is where he went to high school and where one of my sisters lives. Many in Philly moved out there so the county is now more blue than even the purple it was 20 years ago. In fact, the County Commissioners (there are 3) for that county are majority Democrat for the first time in county history (one of the Commissioners used to be Tweety's brother, who is a Republican).
All the rim counties voted for Hillary. The problem is the congressional districts were drawn to split up those rim counties and dilute them with red voters in rural counties, in some cases, almost 70 miles away.
Ligyron
(7,639 posts)I've heard proposals ranging from using drainage districts to dividing a state up into equal land areas based on equal geographic geometry.
I admit, I don't know how it could be fairly done - only how it can be unfairly done.
BumRushDaShow
(129,459 posts)As an example, here is what the most egregious district (PA-7) has morphed into -
The group Fair Districts PA has a section on how they think it can be handled (legislation and an independent board).
Ligyron
(7,639 posts)Crikey, look at that ridiculous 2013 map for the 113th!
BumRushDaShow
(129,459 posts)Ligyron
(7,639 posts)BumRushDaShow
(129,459 posts)(it confused me too initially)
FakeNoose
(32,750 posts)It's all up to the PA Supreme Court now and we must get a quick ruling. Otherwise it will be too late to redraw the districts before the election. We all know this has to be done after the 2020 census anyway, so why not do it now?
Gerrymandering is good for nobody except the incumbent. (Of course the incumbent's party is also helped.) This favoritism has to end and PA has the worst gerrymandering of the entire country. Just once I'd like our state to be the good example rather than the bad example.