You could easily go broke betting on SCOTUS rulings, but this was a positive line of questioning.
At issue is when politicians go too far in drawing lines for partisan gain, and it could be one of the most consequential cases of the court’s term. The justices could, for the first time, establish a standard to decide when politicians go too far in drawing lines for partisan gain, or the court could slam the doors shut on such claims of extreme gerrymandering.Chief Justice John Roberts suggested at one point that it would be hard for the court to police the use of partisanship in map drawing, when the process is intrinsically political. Justice Samuel Alito emerged as the most vocal critic of the court’s involvement, often picking apart the manageability of tests that were presented to the court and worrying that every single dispute in the future would have to be resolved by the judiciary.Justice Brett Kavanaugh — whose vote could be key — said he would not “dispute” that extreme partisan gerrymandering has become a problem that was especially evident in a map drawn in his home state of Maryland. But he also questioned if the courts should stay out of the issue because states are reacting with their own initiatives.It was a sentiment shared by Justice Neil Gorsuch, who said states have “provided remedies in this area.”
But he also questioned if the courts should stay out of the issue because states are reacting with their own initiatives.
So the states made this problem, but it’s not even a problem, and we’ll let them sort it out on their own. Maybe they can come up with a rule that says some districts count for 3/5ths of a vote.