Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

brooklynite

(94,727 posts)
Wed Feb 7, 2018, 06:44 PM Feb 2018

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT

Source: Brennan Center

(this is the formal Judicial Ruling overturning Pennsylvania's partisan gerrymander of Congressional Districts)

OPINION
JUSTICE TODD FILED: February 7, 2018

It is a core principle of our republican form of government “that the voters should choose their representatives, not the other way around.”

In this case, Petitioners allege that the Pennsylvania Congressional Redistricting Act of 20112 (the “2011 Plan”) does the latter, infringing upon that most central of democratic rights – the right to vote.

Specifically, they contend that the 2011 Plan is an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. While federal courts have, to date, been unable to settle on a workable standard by which to assess such claims under the federal Constitution, we find no such barriers under our great Pennsylvania charter. The people of this Commonwealth should never lose sight of the fact that, in its protection of essential rights, our founding document is the ancestor, not the offspring, of the federal Constitution. We conclude that, in this matter, it provides a constitutional standard, and remedy, even if the federal charter does not. Specifically, we hold that the 2011 Plan violates Article I, Section 5 – the Free and Equal Elections Clause – of the Pennsylvania Constitution.

The challenge herein was brought in June 2017 by Petitioners, the League of Women Voters and 18 voters – all registered Democrats, one from each of our state’s congressional districts – against Governor Thomas W. Wolf, Lieutenant Governor Michael J. Stack, III, Secretary Robert Torres, and Commissioner Jonathan M. Marks (collectively, “Executive Respondents”), and the General Assembly, Senate President Pro Tempore Joseph B. Scarnati, III, and House Speaker Michael C. Turzai (collectively, “Legislative Respondents”). Petitioners alleged that the 2011 Plan violated several provisions of our state Constitution.

On January 22, 2018, this Court entered a per curiam order agreeing with Petitioners, and deeming the 2011 Plan to “clearly, plainly and palpably violate[]” our state Constitution, and so enjoined its further use. See Order, 1/22/18. We further provided that, if the General Assembly and the Governor did not enact a remedial plan by February 15, 2018, this Court would choose a remedial plan. For those endeavors, we set forth the criteria to be applied in measuring the constitutionality of any remedial plan, holding that:
"any congressional districting plan shall consist of: congressional districts composed of compact and contiguous territory; as nearly equal in population as practicable; and which do not divide any county, city, incorporated town, borough, township, or ward, except where necessary to ensure equality of population. Order, 1/22/18”

Our Order indicated that an opinion would follow. This is that Opinion, and we emphasize that, while explicating our rationale, nothing in this Opinion is intended to conflict with, or in any way alter, the mandate set forth in our Order of January 22, 2018.


Read more: https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legal-work/LWV_v_PA_Majority-Opinion.pdf

13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT (Original Post) brooklynite Feb 2018 OP
'The people of this Commonwealth should never lose sight of the fact that, elleng Feb 2018 #1
WWE-worthy smack down from the court DeminPennswoods Feb 2018 #8
The Goddamned League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania vs ehrnst Feb 2018 #2
Wow bucolic_frolic Feb 2018 #3
I remember just after the state redistricting BumRushDaShow Feb 2018 #5
Amazing what's Constitutional in 2013 is Unconstitutional in 2018 bucolic_frolic Feb 2018 #7
You can tell the state rep vehicles BumRushDaShow Feb 2018 #10
No it was unconstitutional in 2013 too FakeNoose Feb 2018 #13
Getting change through is tough what with it having to DeminPennswoods Feb 2018 #9
It sounded like getting it through the Senate would be harder BumRushDaShow Feb 2018 #11
Pros and cons to a smaller legislature DeminPennswoods Feb 2018 #12
Off to the greatest with thee! BumRushDaShow Feb 2018 #4
Happy days are here again..... BigmanPigman Feb 2018 #6

elleng

(131,102 posts)
1. 'The people of this Commonwealth should never lose sight of the fact that,
Wed Feb 7, 2018, 06:50 PM
Feb 2018

in its protection of essential rights, our founding document is the ancestor, not the offspring, of the federal Constitution. We conclude that, in this matter, it provides a constitutional standard, and remedy, even if the federal charter does not.'

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
2. The Goddamned League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania vs
Wed Feb 7, 2018, 06:55 PM
Feb 2018

a bunch of GOP shitheads who didn't see this coming.

bucolic_frolic

(43,281 posts)
3. Wow
Wed Feb 7, 2018, 06:58 PM
Feb 2018

Does this extend to the State Legislature as well? After 80 years in power those crooks just about own the state.

BumRushDaShow

(129,440 posts)
5. I remember just after the state redistricting
Wed Feb 7, 2018, 07:11 PM
Feb 2018

they forced the redraw of the state legislative districts several times, and the final time it was approved by the state Supreme Court. It's a shame that this couldn't have been done back then with the Congressional districts but then it was probably because those were even worse.

But now the latest is that they (GOP) want to reduce the number of reps in the chamber, which requires a change in the state Constitution and a series of other things including a ballot question to make the change.

bucolic_frolic

(43,281 posts)
7. Amazing what's Constitutional in 2013 is Unconstitutional in 2018
Wed Feb 7, 2018, 07:32 PM
Feb 2018

Three R Three D court in 2013, Five D Two R court today.

The reps all get cars, don't they? I see so many state vehicles on the road, more than state police!

I went to my local rep's office for tax forms. You have to identify yourself. Name and address. To get a tax form.
Some of which were outdated and no longer apply.

They pay them $88k a year? So they can fund PennDot? I do hope to leave here someday. Or should I say 'flee'.

BumRushDaShow

(129,440 posts)
10. You can tell the state rep vehicles
Wed Feb 7, 2018, 07:37 PM
Feb 2018

because the license plates have single numbers on them.

I have a telephone town hall with my State Senator (D) tomorrow evening for a discussion of the redistricting thing, so can't wait to hear how that is going to proceed, given it is supposed to be done by Friday!

FakeNoose

(32,748 posts)
13. No it was unconstitutional in 2013 too
Thu Feb 8, 2018, 01:57 AM
Feb 2018

... but it has taken this long to get the ruling we needed.

Dems must be ever vigilant, and never let Repukes get away with this shit. It takes too long to undo it. They're always looking for ways to cheat because they can't win in a fair election. They will always be cheating in some way or another. They love gerrymandering because it's the gift that keeps on giving.

BumRushDaShow

(129,440 posts)
11. It sounded like getting it through the Senate would be harder
Wed Feb 7, 2018, 07:40 PM
Feb 2018

too, plus there would be a ballot question which could kill it altogether.

The are trying to frame it as being "cost effective". But what ultimately happens is that the districts get so big (like how the congressional districts are) that your rep really can no longer effectively represent your interests.

BigmanPigman

(51,627 posts)
6. Happy days are here again.....
Wed Feb 7, 2018, 07:25 PM
Feb 2018

YEAH! The Founding Fathers have stopped rolling over in their graves for now.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»IN THE SUPREME COURT OF P...