- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Huge SCOTUS Case Today About Gerrymandering!
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:08 am
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:08 am
This will be the first case about gerrymandering in over a decade, when Vieth v. Jubelirer deeply divided the court. Four justices -Justice Antonin Scalia, joined by then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Sandra Day O’Connor and Clarence Thomas stated that the court should never review partisan gerrymandering cases as it is too difficult to determine influence. Four other justices – Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and Stephen Breyer – disagreed. Kennedy agreed with the latter. Though they didn't decide in regards to that case, they left the door open to future cases. The future is now, as Gill v. Whitford will be argued today. This case is about the redistricting plan passed by Wisconsin’s Republican-controlled legislature in 2011.
This ruling wouldn't only affect Wisconsin though, it could invalidate districts in up to 20 different states.
Mathematecians created the effeciency gap method to try to determine how much partisan gerrymandering played a part in redistricting.
Links:
Scotus Blog
Cornell Legal Information Institute
NYT
Economist
More Perfect Podcast
quote:
The plan was amazingly on target. In the next election in 2012, Republicans, carried only a minority of the state vote — 48.6 percent — but, as the GOP map designers had privately predicted, Republicans still won close to two-thirds of the state assembly seats, a 60-to-39 seat majority.
This ruling wouldn't only affect Wisconsin though, it could invalidate districts in up to 20 different states.
quote:
In the last two decades, the GOP has greatly increased and entrenched its dominance in the state legislatures and Congress through the use of partisan redistricting. The GOP now has control of state legislatures in 32 states, covering 61 percent of the population, while Democrats control just 13 state legislatures, covering 28 percent of the population.
Mathematecians created the effeciency gap method to try to determine how much partisan gerrymandering played a part in redistricting.
quote:
The efficiency gap is simply the difference between the parties' respective wasted votes in an election, divided by the total number of votes cast. ... When a party gerrymanders a state, it tries to maximize the wasted votes for the opposing party while minimizing its own, thus producing a large efficiency gap
Links:
Scotus Blog
Cornell Legal Information Institute
NYT
Economist
More Perfect Podcast
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:10 am to fouldeliverer
Huge MISTAKE Posting This On The Wrong Board!
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:13 am to fouldeliverer
Are you a fricking moron?
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:14 am to fouldeliverer
Accidentally upvoted. your post is on the wrong board. Hopefully admin will fix. Some political stuff is fine here on OT. This is deeply political. Gtfo
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:14 am to fouldeliverer
SCOTUS,
I'm really happy for you and Imma let you finish,
but gerrymandering is one of the greatest gerunds of all time.
OF ALL TIME!
I'm really happy for you and Imma let you finish,
but gerrymandering is one of the greatest gerunds of all time.
OF ALL TIME!
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:14 am to LSUBoo
Where else should I post it, the conspiracy board masquerading as a Poli board?
Those guys are too busy trying to find the second shooter on the fourth floor to actually care about things that matter.
Those guys are too busy trying to find the second shooter on the fourth floor to actually care about things that matter.
This post was edited on 10/3/17 at 7:17 am
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:17 am to fouldeliverer
quote:
Where else should I post it
Literally anywhere but here
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:19 am to fouldeliverer
Why don't we have a standard size square to draw districts?
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:20 am to fouldeliverer
quote:
Where else should I post it, the conspiracy board masquerading as a Poli board?
Yes.
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:27 am to GetCocky11
I really hate gerrymandering . To me, district lines must be drawn using country/parish lines. The only exception would be if a district was wholly inside a single county/parish, then you can get creative. But that's it.
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:28 am to LSUSUPERSTAR
quote:
Why don't we have a standard size square to draw districts?
Because that's not how people live. The population isn't divided up into nice even squares.
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:29 am to crazycubes
quote:
I really hate gerrymandering . To me, district lines must be drawn using country/parish lines. The only exception would be if a district was wholly inside a single county/parish, then you can get creative. But that's it.
Can't do that because of Baker v Carr. One person, one vote. Rural counties would have an extreme disproportionate amount of power due to population density.
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:33 am to fouldeliverer
Although it is the wrong board, you're right about some of the lunatics on PT. I just went over there and some people suggest this is the start of a new American civil war. Good God, there are some crazy frickers there.
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:33 am to fouldeliverer
Can't you lump multiple counties into one district , though? I'm fine with that idea. I just want district lines to follow county lines even it it's more than one county
Eta I can't stand those districts that are 1 mile wide and 100 miles long.
Eta I can't stand those districts that are 1 mile wide and 100 miles long.
This post was edited on 10/3/17 at 7:34 am
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:35 am to fouldeliverer
I like Gerry Raferty better than Gerrymandering
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:36 am to fouldeliverer
quote:
Where else should I post it
Post it up your arse, but don't post it here...
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:43 am to fouldeliverer
quote:
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
I hate that fricking bitch.
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:45 am to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
quote: Ruth Bader Ginsburg I hate that fricking bitch.
Is it because you are antisemitic or a misogynist?
Posted on 10/3/17 at 7:49 am to fouldeliverer
Hard for me to see any possible way gerrymandering is unconstitutional. Party affiliations change all the time. Being a Democrat is not the same as being black. You're going to see a plurality opinion holding that the claim is justiciable but gerrymandering is constitutional, and you're going to see three big league melts in dissent by Ginsberg, Sotomayor and Breyer.
This post was edited on 10/3/17 at 8:05 am
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News