- 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
Can the Virginia vote be voided by SCITUS?
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:06 pm
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:06 pm
asking because I don’t know
This post was edited on 4/21/26 at 8:07 pm
9
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:07 pm to dcbl
They'll only void it if a "legitimate" race based challenge can be brought.
I put that in quotes because none of those challenges are actually legitimate.
I put that in quotes because none of those challenges are actually legitimate.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:08 pm to dcbl
Voided on what grounds?
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:08 pm to dcbl
The supreme courts opinion of gerrymandering is:
You can gerrymander all you want... except by race... unless it's to help blacks, then you're actually required to do it.
I'm not even kidding that's basically where things stand
You can gerrymander all you want... except by race... unless it's to help blacks, then you're actually required to do it.
I'm not even kidding that's basically where things stand
This post was edited on 4/21/26 at 8:09 pm
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:11 pm to StansberryRules
I read an on point comment on this board once regarding racial gerrymandering: blacks have confused the right to vote with the right to win.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:11 pm to StansberryRules
How many republican appointed justices are on the SC?
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:12 pm to dcbl
Why would they? They allowed and encouraged this with their previous rulings about gerrymandering. They said it was none of their (SCOTUS) business.
LINK
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued March 26, 2019
Decided June 27, 2019
Full case name Robert A. Rucho et al. v. Common Cause et al.
Rucho v. Common Cause, No. 18-422, 588 U.S. 684 (2019) is a landmark case of the United States Supreme Court concerning partisan gerrymandering. The Court ruled that while partisan gerrymandering may be "incompatible with democratic principles", the federal courts cannot review such allegations, as they present nonjusticiable political questions outside the jurisdiction of these courts.
The case was one of three heard in the 2018 term dealing with issues related to partisan gerrymandering used in the districting plans of states. It was combined with Rucho v. League of Women Voters of North Carolina, and its decision included the Court's judgment on Lamone v. Benisek, a partisan gerrymandering case from Maryland.
LINK
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued March 26, 2019
Decided June 27, 2019
Full case name Robert A. Rucho et al. v. Common Cause et al.
Rucho v. Common Cause, No. 18-422, 588 U.S. 684 (2019) is a landmark case of the United States Supreme Court concerning partisan gerrymandering. The Court ruled that while partisan gerrymandering may be "incompatible with democratic principles", the federal courts cannot review such allegations, as they present nonjusticiable political questions outside the jurisdiction of these courts.
The case was one of three heard in the 2018 term dealing with issues related to partisan gerrymandering used in the districting plans of states. It was combined with Rucho v. League of Women Voters of North Carolina, and its decision included the Court's judgment on Lamone v. Benisek, a partisan gerrymandering case from Maryland.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:12 pm to StansberryRules
quote:
The supreme courts opinion of gerrymandering is:
You can gerrymander all you want... except by race... unless it's to help blacks, then you're actually required to do it.
I'm not even kidding that's basically where things stand
For now. That's likely going to change as soon as Roberts pulls his head out of his arse and tell the dissent to put up or shut up.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:17 pm to udtiger
That will be the race issue, which I hope is overturned.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:20 pm to dcbl
Virginia can do what they want. The idiots are going to get a shite sandwich and that is what they deserve
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:27 pm to TurkeyBaconLeg
It has already been ruled illegal by a district court judge but was allowed to continue while in the courts. The Virginia Supreme Court will end up having to decide.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:28 pm to DEG
quote:
How many republican appointed justices are on the SC?
It should not matter. Alas, that is the problem with our justice system and activist leftist judges.
A judge should be non-partisan regarding politics and only partisan to the meaning of the Constitution and not what they think it means.
Leftist on the SC base decisions more on politics and what they want the Constitution to say.
Conservatives are more likely to base their decisions on what the original intent of the Constitution is and not what they want it to be.
That clear it up for you?
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:30 pm to dcbl
This is cope
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:31 pm to dcbl
If an alcoholic doesn't want help then you can't help them.
If Virgina doesn't want a great state then you can't vote for them.
It's what Virgina wants.. let them have it
If Virgina doesn't want a great state then you can't vote for them.
It's what Virgina wants.. let them have it
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:39 pm to FLTech
quote:
If an alcoholic doesn't want help then you can't help them.
If Virgina doesn't want a great state then you can't vote for them.
It's what Virgina wants.. let them have it
Very unthoughtful stance considering red Virginians - mostly generationally rooted in Virginia soil - are outnumbered by blue leftists, mostly interlopers.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:42 pm to prouddawg
Most of the dem govs have been Yankee POS transplants since I can remember.
Northum was the only one that can think of that was an actual Virginian and that’s minor stretch as he was a Delmarva turd.
Northum was the only one that can think of that was an actual Virginian and that’s minor stretch as he was a Delmarva turd.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:43 pm to Speckhunter2012
quote:
That clear it up for you?
Nope. You didn’t even come close to answering my very simple question.
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:43 pm to FLTech
quote:
It's what Virgina wants.. let them have it
Considering these are federal legislators, they kind of impact all of us
Posted on 4/21/26 at 8:46 pm to dcbl
Should the Texas one that wasn’t voted on also be voided?
Posted on 4/21/26 at 9:09 pm to dcbl
I heard that it's being challenged on some kind of VA constitutional grounds, so maybe their SC can over turn it?
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News