posted 06-21-2019 12:13 PM                  

By Lawrence Hurley, Reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday handed Republican legislators in Virginia a defeat, leaving in place a ruling that invalidated state electoral districts they drew because they weakened the clout of black voters in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

The justices, in a 5-4 decision, sidestepped a ruling on the merits of the case. They instead found that the Republican-led state House of Delegates lacked the necessary legal standing to appeal a lower court ruling that had invalidated 11 state House districts for racial discrimination.

Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring, a Democrat and the state's top law enforcement official, opposed the appeal and argued that the Republican legislators were not entitled to act on behalf of the state in the case. A new political map is being used for this year's state elections.

"Virginia's elections this fall will take place in fair, constitutional districts. It's a good day for democracy in Virginia," Herring wrote on Twitter.

The Supreme Court's action let stand a 2018 ruling by a federal three-judge panel that the 11 districts all violated the rights of black voters to equal protection under the law under the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment.

The state's Republican-led House of Delegates "lacks authority to displace Virginia's attorney general as representative of the state," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote for the court's majority.

"In short, Virginia would rather stop than fight on. One house of its bicameral legislature cannot alone continue the litigation against the will of its partners in the legislative process," Ginsburg added.

The court was not split on ideological lines, with Ginsburg joined in the majority by fellow liberal justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor as well as two conservative justices, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch.

The case involved a hot topic for the Supreme Court: a practice called gerrymandering involving the manipulation of electoral district boundaries to marginalise a certain set of voters and increase the influence of others. In this case, the Republican legislators were accused of racial gerrymandering to disadvantage black voters.

In two other major cases from Maryland and North Carolina, the justices are considering whether courts can curb gerrymandering aimed at purely partisan advantage. They are due to rule in those cases by the end of this month.

At issue in the Virginia case was the state legislative map drawn by Republicans after the 2010 national census.

'SEEDS CONFUSION'

The National Republican Redistricting Trust, a group that backs Republican efforts to redraw electoral districts, criticized the ruling.

"It seeds confusion into a volatile, evolving body of law that demands clarity just as the next redistricting cycle begins," said Adam Kincaid, the group's executive director.
New electoral maps will be drawn nationwide following the 2020 census.

Since the Virginia maps that were challenged in the case were drawn, Democrats have made gains in Virginia in both state and federal elections. The current governor, Ralph Northam, and Herring, both are Democrats. Northam has been involved in a racial controversy of his own this year after a racist photo from his 1984 medical school yearbook page surfaced.

"This is a welcome ruling from the Supreme Court - it's like I've always said, voters should choose their representatives, not the other way around," Northam said on Twitter.
Like other U.S. southern states, Virginia has a complicated racial history dating back to the era of slavery.

The voters who brought the legal challenge accused Republicans of packing black voters into certain state House districts to diminish their voting power and make surrounding districts more white and more likely to support Republicans.

Democrats have accused President Donald Trump's fellow Republicans in Virginia and other states of crafting such legislative maps in a way that crams black and other minority voters, who tend to favor Democratic candidates, into certain districts in order to reduce their overall sway in the state.

http://www.yahoo.com/news/virginia-republicans-lose-u-supreme-180024068.html

posted 06-21-2019 05:24 PM                  

And, only Republicans in 2018 had their candidates election overturned for voter fraud.

posted 06-21-2019 11:29 PM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tomcal:
Ed,

Your spot on right, for a change. Truly, only Republican do it.

And, only Republicans in 2018 had their candidates election overturned for voter fraud.

---

posted 06-27-2019 09:48 AM                  

U.S. Supreme Court rejects limits to partisan gerrymandering

WASHINGTON, June 27 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday rejected efforts to rein in the contentious practice of manipulating electoral district boundaries to entrench one party in power by turning away challenges to political maps in Maryland and North Carolina.
The justices, in a 5-4 decision, sided with Democratic legislators in Maryland and Republican lawmakers in North Carolina who drew electoral district boundaries, saying in a decision with nationwide implications that judges do not have the ability to curb the practice known as partisan gerrymandering.

The ruling delivered a setback to election reformers who had hoped the court would intervene over a growing trend in which parties that control state legislatures use the electoral district line-drawing process to cement their grip on power and dilute the voting power of people who support the rival party.

The high court previously had struggled to resolve the legality of partisan gerrymandering, a longstanding practice in which boundaries of legislative districts are reworked with the aim of tightening one party's grip on power. The justices in June 2018 failed to issue definitive rulings on partisan gerrymandering in two cases - this same one from Maryland and another involving a Republican-drawn electoral map in Wisconsin.
The boundaries of legislative districts across the country are redrawn to reflect population changes contained in the census conducted by the federal government every decade, a head count mandated by the U.S. Constitution.
This redistricting in most states is carried out by the party in power, though some states in the interest of fairness assign the task to independent commissions. Gerrymandering typically involves politicians drawing legislative districts to pack voters who tend to favor a particular party into a small number of districts to diminish their statewide voting power while dispersing others in districts in numbers too small to be a majority.
Critics have said partisan gerrymandering, when taken to extremes, warps democracy by intentionally diluting the power of some voters and the electability candidates they support.
Gerrymandering is a practice dating back two centuries in the United States. But critics have said it is becoming more extreme with the use of precision computer modeling to guide the creation of district boundaries that maximize the clout of one party's voters at the expense of other voters.
While the Supreme Court has ruled against gerrymandering intended to harm the electoral clout of racial minorities, it has never curbed gerrymandering carried out purely for partisan advantage.
Democrats have said partisan gerrymandering by Republicans in such states as Wisconsin and Pennsylvania helped President Donald Trump's party maintain control of the U.S. House and various state legislatures for years, although Democrats seized control of the House in last November's elections and made inroads in state legislatures. (Reporting by Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung)

posted 06-27-2019 01:07 PM                  

SCOTUS ruled on RACIAL gerrymandering in Dem favor.

posted 06-28-2019 01:26 PM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by ed monahan:
It says the judges don't have the power to stop it. It is going to continue since both parties have been doing it for a couple of centuries. Gerrymandering is going to continue.

---

Old Ed, still denying his comprehension problems. Appears he also has vision deficiencys

The judges DO HAVE THE POWER TO STOP RACIAL GERRYMANDERING.

Perhaps this will help Ed's comprehension and vision impairments.

"Virginia Republicans lose in U.S. Supreme Court racial gerrymandering case"

By Lawrence Hurley, Reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday handed Republican legislators in Virginia a defeat, leaving in place a ruling that invalidated state electoral districts they drew because they weakened the clout of black voters in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

The justices, in a 5-4 decision, sidestepped a ruling on the merits of the case. They instead found that the Republican-led state House of Delegates lacked the necessary legal standing to appeal a lower court ruling that had invalidated 11 state House districts for racial discrimination.

Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring, a Democrat and the state's top law enforcement official, opposed the appeal and argued that the Republican legislators were not entitled to act on behalf of the state in the case. A new political map is being used for this year's state elections.

"Virginia's elections this fall will take place in fair, constitutional districts. It's a good day for democracy in Virginia," Herring wrote on Twitter.

The Supreme Court's action let stand a 2018 ruling by a federal three-judge panel that the 11 districts all violated the rights of black voters to equal protection under the law under the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment.

The state's Republican-led House of Delegates "lacks authority to displace Virginia's attorney general as representative of the state," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote for the court's majority.

"In short, Virginia would rather stop than fight on. One house of its bicameral legislature cannot alone continue the litigation against the will of its partners in the legislative process," Ginsburg added.

The court was not split on ideological lines, with Ginsburg joined in the majority by fellow liberal justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor as well as two conservative justices, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch.

The case involved a hot topic for the Supreme Court: a practice called gerrymandering involving the manipulation of electoral district boundaries to marginalise a certain set of voters and increase the influence of others. In this case, the Republican legislators were accused of racial gerrymandering to disadvantage black voters.

In two other major cases from Maryland and North Carolina, the justices are considering whether courts can curb gerrymandering aimed at purely partisan advantage. They are due to rule in those cases by the end of this month.

At issue in the Virginia case was the state legislative map drawn by Republicans after the 2010 national census.

'SEEDS CONFUSION'

The National Republican Redistricting Trust, a group that backs Republican efforts to redraw electoral districts, criticized the ruling.

"It seeds confusion into a volatile, evolving body of law that demands clarity just as the next redistricting cycle begins," said Adam Kincaid, the group's executive director.
New electoral maps will be drawn nationwide following the 2020 census.

Since the Virginia maps that were challenged in the case were drawn, Democrats have made gains in Virginia in both state and federal elections. The current governor, Ralph Northam, and Herring, both are Democrats. Northam has been involved in a racial controversy of his own this year after a racist photo from his 1984 medical school yearbook page surfaced.

"This is a welcome ruling from the Supreme Court - it's like I've always said, voters should choose their representatives, not the other way around," Northam said on Twitter.
Like other U.S. southern states, Virginia has a complicated racial history dating back to the era of slavery.

The voters who brought the legal challenge accused Republicans of packing black voters into certain state House districts to diminish their voting power and make surrounding districts more white and more likely to support Republicans.

Democrats have accused President Donald Trump's fellow Republicans in Virginia and other states of crafting such legislative maps in a way that crams black and other minority voters, who tend to favor Democratic candidates, into certain districts in order to reduce their overall sway in the state.
http://www.yahoo.com/news/virginia-republicans-lose-u-supreme-180024068.html [/size]

posted 06-28-2019 03:54 PM                  

Seems to be a consistent bad trait among Far Right Repukelican.

Must be all that inbreeding with Kelly Ann. Leads to incurable Alternative Facts Disease.

SAD.....

Virginia Republicans lose in U.S. Supreme Court racial gerrymandering case

posted 06-28-2019 06:15 PM                  

Try these on, it may help.

"Virginia Republicans lose in U.S. Supreme Court racial gerrymandering case"

posted 06-28-2019 06:16 PM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tomcal:

Virginia Republicans lose in U.S. Supreme Court racial gerrymandering case[/B]

---

In typical liberal fashion, Tom thinks that "shouting" in super-huge font lends credibility to his misleading headline.
It's misleading to say republicans "lost" because SCOTUS didn't rule on the merits of the case. They ruled that the state of VA lacked the legal standing to appeal a lower court's decision.

But does anyone else see something funny here?
In the VA lower court case, the court ruled that gerrymandering along racial lines is unconstitutional. At the same time, they acknowledge that blacks tend to vote democrat and whites tend to vote republican.

Then, in their decision to NOT hear the MD and NC cases, SCOTUS states that gerrymandering along partisan lines is OK.
But if there's a clear connection between race and partisanship, then the 2 rulings are contradictory.

I don't think this one's over.

posted 06-28-2019 07:04 PM                  

A really bad attempt at spinning.

SAD.....

posted 06-28-2019 09:17 PM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by Landscape Doctor:
Oucha!!!!
http://www.instagram.com/p/BzPOWZ1gjKj/?igshid=g9mnsj8cbz1h

---

posted 06-29-2019 01:12 PM                  

Suggest you write to the SCOTUS asking them to explain the difference to you.

You clearly do not understand.

Also, suggest you write to Reuters News to complain about their headline.

Let us know when you hear back from both.

BTW.... have you heard back from Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Dow Jones, Standard and Poors, etc, about a retraction of their articles.

Post their responses here, please.