Now we will see how partisan they are. Most gerrymandering has been done to benefit Republicans. Nobody should do it and it should be banned.
The Supreme Court appeared unlikely Tuesday to rule that federal courts have a role in deciding how much partisanship is too much when state legislatures draw the maps for voting districts.https://t.co/lLSXkD5lcJ
— Pete Williams (@PeteWilliamsNBC) March 26, 2019
With Kavanaugh, conservatives may now have the votes on the Supreme Court to insulate partisan gerrymandering from constitutional challenges. Arguments start at 10. https://t.co/vbJgcHRHW5
— Greg Stohr (@GregStohr) March 26, 2019
Partisan gerrymandering goes before the Supreme Court today with two cases concerning Maryland & North Carolina. Here’s an illustration showing just how massive of a difference it makes depending on who draws the lines https://t.co/JmkjK904SQ pic.twitter.com/p1SvvO5UlD
— Stephen Wolf (@PoliticsWolf) March 26, 2019
Kavanaugh appeared closer than Roberts to joining Kagan’s crusade and placing limits on “really extreme” gerrymanders. https://t.co/jKlUqXsGt5
— Slate (@Slate) March 26, 2019
Voters should be able to choose their elected officials without the influence of partisan meddling. That's why I have the only bill in Congress to explicitly ban partisan #gerrymandering. We need to fix our broken political system. https://t.co/CY4mRwZVmi
— Michael Bennet (@MichaelBennet) March 25, 2019
Today, the Supreme Court is taking up the issue of gerrymandering.
— CNN (@CNN) March 26, 2019
“Redistricting reform is an issue that should be beyond right and left. It’s about right and wrong,” @JohnAvlon says in this morning’s #RealityCheck. https://t.co/uRkGn0XqOn pic.twitter.com/EuuyaMSEnr
Not just that, but to take cases of racial gerrymandering and say "well this is just partisan and we can't do anything about it." https://t.co/W7DhrdWpW1
— b-boy bouiebaisse (@jbouie) March 26, 2019
Two huge gerrymandering cases at Supreme Court today. If court upholds extreme partisan gerrymandering that will allow Republicans to rig elections for next decade. Pay attention to this https://t.co/fQIEuXndOO
— Ari Berman (@AriBerman) March 26, 2019
The Supreme Court on Tuesday will not have to debate whether a group of North Carolina politicians deliberately redrew election maps to give their party the maximum partisan advantage.
— Los Angeles Times (@latimes) March 26, 2019
The state’s Republican leaders admitted to doing exactly that. https://t.co/XO7UqPoqF9
Today at the Supreme Court: Two new challenges to partisan gerrymanderinghttps://t.co/vDbV9ZF9fr
— Adam Liptak (@adamliptak) March 26, 2019
For the second straight year, the Supreme Court has an opportunity to establish limits on partisan gerrymanderinghttps://t.co/6CpQtqmJW7
— POLITICO (@politico) March 26, 2019
The Supreme Court's conservative majority seems terrified that every vote might count equally, @AriBerman reports from today's gerrymandering hearings: https://t.co/NnWkIvGxzd
— Aaron Wiener (@aaronwiener) March 26, 2019
It would be hilarious if the fact that Maryland Dems gerrymandered the places where two conservative justifies live leads to the justices killing gerrymandering everywhere (which would largely benefit Dems) https://t.co/oK5sU2Gmdr
— Dave Weigel (@daveweigel) March 26, 2019
"Extreme partisan gerrymandering harms our political system, and harms the functioning of the House of Representatives in particular" write a bipartisan group of 40 current and former members of Congress in an amicus brief in today's #FairMaps #SCOTUS case https://t.co/9J6C9BWIio pic.twitter.com/MYdSVIBLJd
— Michael Beckel (@mjbeckel) March 26, 2019
Gorsuch & Kavanaugh cited success of state-level ballot initiatives creating independent redistricting commissions as reason SCOTUS didn’t need to curb partisan gerrymandering. They didn’t mention 4 conservative justices voted to gut independent commissions in 2015 pic.twitter.com/nRALfPJqTQ
— Ari Berman (@AriBerman) March 26, 2019
LIVE: Protesters rally against gerrymandering in Washington, D.C. as issue reaches Supreme Court. https://t.co/qDSjHTyUUf
— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) March 26, 2019
First, the slope of the relationship between seats and votes has flattened since 1994, making seat swings less responsive to vote shifts. In addition, the Republicans have enjoyed an average eight-seat bonus since 2010 that persisted into 2018.https://t.co/AZOxklG6GZ pic.twitter.com/6jOEH22jm8
— Peter H. Lemieux (@PeterHLemieux) March 26, 2019
Sad! 