SCOTUS's 'partisan gerrymandering' rulings praised

Wednesday, June 20, 2018
 | 
Chad Groening (OneNewsNow.com)

U.S. Supreme CourtA former United States Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney is praising the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) for its decision on "partisan gerrymandering."

In the two cases, the high court unanimously ruled that state legislatures – not courts – have the authority to draw Congressional boundaries – except in cases where a redistricting plan targets a "racial minority for special discriminatory treatment."

The redistricting plan formulated by the Republican-controlled legislature in Wisconsin was challenged in SCOTUS by Democrats who alleged that the boundaries were gerrymandered in order to benefit the GOP.

SCOTUS’s 9–0 ruling let those boundaries stand.

However, the Supreme Court also ruled against a Republican challenge to a Democratic plan to redraw a Maryland Congressional district.

Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) Founder and Chief Counsel J. Christian Adams – a former DOJ attorney – explained the significance of SCOTUS’s rulings.

"It means that the Supreme Court is not going to get in the business of deciding what district lines are anytime soon,” Adams stressed. “They're going to leave that to the people who have always done it with their state legislatures.”

He then pointed out who the losers are after the decisions.

“There are people who want the courts to be deciding district lines all the time,” Adams asserted. “And this was a defeat for those people who want the courts to do it instead of legislatures."

Adams also maintained that these rulings will help candidates campaigning in the midterms.

"The court was unwilling to issue any kind of injunctions that allow the elections to go on as normal, so it will obviously have the effect of keeping the schedule," the legal expert impressed.

Adams announced that the PILF recently filed an amicus brief on behalf of the American Civil Rights Union (ACRU), arguing that the United States Constitution grants states the power over elections.

Comments

We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses the article - NOT another reader's comments. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will not be approved. More details

SIGN UP FOR OUR DAILY NEWSBRIEF

SUBSCRIBE

VOTE IN OUR POLL

It appears Democrats view healthcare as the major issue for the 2020 election – do you agree?

CAST YOUR VOTE

GET PUSH NOTIFICATIONS

SUBSCRIBE

LATEST AP HEADLINES

Trump: U.S. locked and loaded in response to drone attack
Energy prices spike after Saudi oil attack, U.S. blaming Iran
No Deal: Auto workers strike against GM in contract dispute
Gun control must include background checks, Dems tell Trump
Dem presidential candidates call for Kavanaugh's impeachment

LATEST FROM THE WEB

Liberty students protest in wake of reports about Falwell
Beto the drunk driving furry is less amusing when he calls for violence against American citizens
Whites need not apply: Campus sci-tech symposium to only feature scholars of color
Back off from the ‘resist’ nonsense
Ex-NFL player tries to pull a 'Jussie Smollett' in Georgia

CARTOON OF THE DAY

Cartoon of the Day
NEXT STORY
SCOTUS confirms the right to pray

U.S. Supreme Court w/ flagJune brought plenty of big surprises from the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), with a major one being the reversal of a case involving prayer.