Supreme Court will decide soon on the 2020 Census and partisan gerrymandering

The Supreme Court will make decisions on two cases with major ramifications for the future.

They will rule on two cases of partisan gerrymandering and whether the Trump administration can add the citizenship question to the 2020 census. I expect the majority to make partisan rulings that toss fairness aside and help the Republicans that appointed them. If this happens, it will damage the already shaky credibility of the Court. It will become just another political component like Congress and the presidency. Sad!

Supreme Court set to decide major census, electoral maps cases https://t.co/lgKGa8rAM8 pic.twitter.com/8L46PWepCQ
— Reuters Top News (@Reuters) June 23, 2019

Opinion: Yes, the public’s perception of the Supreme Court matters https://t.co/T629nLJhd7
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) June 19, 2019

"If Roberts were to uphold the citizenship question, it would make clear that he values the preservation of white political power more than the court’s reputation as a fair and nonpartisan actor." https://t.co/W2J2W8aHAe
— Mother Jones (@MotherJones) June 20, 2019

Justice Thomas is essentially laying the intellectual groundwork for a massive revisiting of settled precedents. This can prove to be very, very dangerous. https://t.co/BhrBjdClRg
— Neal Katyal (@neal_katyal) June 17, 2019

One donor paid $17,000,000 to help Kavanaugh lie his way onto the Court. Shouldn’t we know who that was? . . . and what business he or she has before the Court? https://t.co/yUvMXzyerQ
— Sheldon Whitehouse (@SenWhitehouse) June 20, 2019

"On Thursday, the conservative wing of the Supreme Court called into question the whole project of modern American governance." My take on Gundy v. United States in the @nytimes. https://t.co/PJLfHMd0bV
— Nicholas Bagley (@nicholas_bagley) June 21, 2019

The Supreme Court will help Republicans rig the 2020 Census

I expect the Republican-controlled court to rule in favor of adding the citizenship question which will help Republicans by hurting Democrats. It won’t matter that the Trump administration has lied and that it was a blatantly political move that had nothing to do with enforcing the Voting Rights Act.

The Census case hinges on whether the Supreme Court will give its blessing to an overt effort to increase white political power, a dangerous step towards White Man’s Government by another name. https://t.co/WiUyGtjUpR
— Adam Serwer🍝 (@AdamSerwer) June 4, 2019

Read @JamilSmith on rigging the Census https://t.co/Y5BiUNs8Xl
— Adam Serwer🍝 (@AdamSerwer) June 4, 2019

Most important and overlooked story from last week: Why GOP wanted citizenship question on Census? To “be advantageous to Republicans and Non-Hispanic Whites,” or, rather, to disenfranchise voters of color https://t.co/Bir3p9f8g3
— Kevin B. Blackistone (@ProfBlackistone) June 1, 2019

Even more proof emerges that the Trump administration is adding a citizenship question to help white Republicans. Is the Supreme Court going to care? I'm not optimistic: https://t.co/0whhwUqZCb
— Paul Waldman (@paulwaldman1) May 30, 2019

This week the hood came off. The administration’s census citizenship question is racism justified with a lie: https://t.co/Ifc91QmQQQ
— Dana Milbank (@Milbank) May 31, 2019

I know there's a lot going on these days, but the GOP trying to manipulate the census to undercount non-Whites and lying to the court about it is a political scandal that will massively impact this country for decades. Everyone should be paying attention. https://t.co/kuYxk938q8
— Susan Hennessey (@Susan_Hennessey) May 31, 2019

It’s always been clear why the Trump Administration put a citizenship question on the 2020 Census:

To decrease political representation for immigrant communities for their own partisan advantage.

Now there are receipts. https://t.co/XgdPfONWzy
— Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) May 30, 2019

Over two dozen Trump nominees won’t endorse the Brown vs. Board of Education decision

Today is the 65th anniversary of this landmark Supreme Court decision against school segregation. I can’t understand why you wouldn’t agree with it….unless you’re a racist.

Sherrilyn Ifill: For nearly 65 years, the legal consensus around Brown was unequivocal. But since April 2018, more than two dozen Trump nominees, including new judge Wendy Vitter and deputy attorney general Jeffrey Rosen, have declined to endorse it. https://t.co/75hVzmBpaU
— Keith Boykin (@keithboykin) May 17, 2019

Today is the 65th anniversary of Brown v. Bd of Educ. Yet while we celebrate this anniversary and its beneficial impact on millions of Americans, Trump has nominated and McConnell’s Senate has confirmed numerous judicial nominees who REFUSE to say Brown was correctly decided. Sad
— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) May 17, 2019

Sez @Eugene_Scott : Brown embodies the legal foundation on which all other desegregation decisions were based and the principle on which our federal civil rights laws were premised.https://t.co/9d1xR0Rvvh
— Vanessa Williams (@WaPoVanessa) May 17, 2019

Brown v. Board of Education is more than a historic ruling. It paved the way for #CivilRights progress & laid the foundation for equal protection under the law. Refusing to affirm #BrownvBoard is to lack fidelity to the rule of law. More via @USATODAY: https://t.co/c4cb3GM15X
— Derrick Johnson (@DerrickNAACP) May 17, 2019

1/2 I’m with ⁦@Sifill_LDF⁩. Brown v. Board gave black children the right to attend school with white children & ended separate but equal. If you won’t commit to Brown in your confirmation hearing, you shouldn’t be a federal judge or the Deputy AG. https://t.co/sv1SSl1nKJ
— Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) May 13, 2019

Court throws out Republican Ohio gerrymandering

This will wind up in the Supreme Court with the other gerrymandering cases. The gerrymandering was extreme.

BREAKING – WE JUST WON OUR CASE CHALLENGING OHIO'S GERRYMANDERED MAP – (longer analysis to follow!) @ACLU pic.twitter.com/P2B8BIR0Cl
— ACLU of Ohio (@acluohio) May 3, 2019

Gerrymandered maps in Ohio have rigged elections for too long. We’re glad to see these unfair maps ruled unconstitutional. https://t.co/1tzX1HP0o5
— Let America Vote (@letamericavote) May 3, 2019

This decision follows the trial in which the map was rightly dubbed a ‘geographic monstrosity.’

Voters must choose their elected officials. Not the other way around.https://t.co/ZwveYF7HTU
— ACLU (@ACLU) May 3, 2019

Big news:

A 3-judge US District Court panel has ruled Ohio's congressional map is unconstitutional because of gerrymandering & needs to be redrawn.

"The Ohio map sacrifices respect for traditional districting principles in order to maximize pro-Republican partisan advantage." pic.twitter.com/wQu4PzOtXj
— Taylor Popielarz (@TaylorPopielarz) May 3, 2019

Lindsay Graham just keeps getting worse

Republicans are pushing their fake idea that the investigation was illegitimate.

I can’t believe this needs to be said out loud, but the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee calling the Chief Justice personally and asking him to “look into” how a lower federal court handled a series of cases is so wildly inappropriate as to almost defy description. https://t.co/TBaBpzgUmO
— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) May 2, 2019

Trump thinks the Supreme Court is his ally

He makes everything political.

Trump views the Supreme Court as an ally, sowing doubt about its independence among his critics https://t.co/TuLQwWtnw9
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) April 27, 2019

It sounds like the Supreme Court will cave in on the census citizenship question

This sounds bad based on reports from yesterday’s court hearing. The Republican-selected judges will support Trump and damage Democrats. Ross has lied about the reason for the question. It will result in damage to the court’s credibility, too. Sad!

If #SCOTUS makes a habit of upholding Trump Administration policies on the basis of ostentatiously false explanations, it will encourage profound cynicism about the rule of law and justified doubt about its own legitimacy.#Census2020
— Joshua Matz (@JoshuaMatz8) April 23, 2019

Some quick thoughts on the Supreme Court conservative majority seeming inclined in oral arguments to support the Trump administration's addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 Census, as it pertains to Mitch McConnell:
— Alec MacGillis (@AlecMacGillis) April 25, 2019

Attempting court packing may be the only sensible response if the census case goes the direction it looks like it’s going to go. https://t.co/MA9iQOCgly
— Slate (@Slate) April 24, 2019

They put a citizenship question in the census to chill participation among immigrant communities – this is something Bannon and Miller and anti immigrant forces were pushing, and if you think the Trump DOJ wanted more data to better enforce the Voting Rights Act you are nuts.
— Brian Schatz (@brianschatz) April 24, 2019

NEW: John Gore, head of the DOJ Civil Rights division, will not show up for a deposition tomorrow with Cummings' committee because they won't let him bring in DOJ lawyers. They want to ask him about the 2020 census citizenship question.

Story TK
— Betsy Woodruff (@woodruffbets) April 24, 2019

How the citizenship question could break the census

I expected this from Roberts. Utterly disingenuous, and a part of his ongoing efforts to deny voting rights to minorities. We saw it in Shelby County. https://t.co/VQM170wSk5
— Norman Ornstein (@NormOrnstein) April 23, 2019

With citizenship question on census, "California would probably lose a (House) seat, and other states with large immigrant populations, such as New York and Texas, could lose seats as well." https://t.co/hnItr3t0t6
— Dana Milbank (@Milbank) April 22, 2019

At Supreme Court argument Tuesday on Census citizenship question, 9 justices and 4 Pinocchios: https://t.co/QbtjuOUmLr
— Dana Milbank (@Milbank) April 22, 2019

The Trump administration and Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices Tuesday held a legal seminar on how to preserve white hegemony in four easy steps. https://t.co/Zzf0tvtwfi
— Dana Milbank (@Milbank) April 23, 2019

Why are they asking that? A guide to the 2020 census via @PRBdata https://t.co/zIWbX7cEQ0
— All Things Census (@allthingscensus) April 24, 2019

At SCOTUS this morning, Justice Sotomayor was not buying the Trump administration's representation that the census has been asking about citizenship for decades. She cut into the SG's argument almost immediately and noted it hasn't been asked on decennial census since 1950
— Sam Levine (@srl) April 23, 2019

Supreme Court appears likely to uphold Trump’s push to add census citizenship question https://t.co/HoqdGzhwtc
— David Savage (@DavidGSavage) April 23, 2019

According to this early oral argument report, Chief Justice Roberts says getting citizenship question on census is essential to enforcing the Voting Rights Act.
But experts have said it is not. And the evidence shows this was not the reason that Ross wanted to add the question. https://t.co/MoLL4y6tuJ
— Rick Hasen (@rickhasen) April 23, 2019

JUST IN: You can listen to the Supreme Court oral arguments over the #2020Census #CitizenshipQuestion here👇https://t.co/LF6Zpn4fYi
— Hansi Lo Wang (@hansilowang) April 26, 2019