One-Person-One-Vote Wins Surprising Supreme Court Victory
By Kevin Drum
The most recent attempt to increase the voting weight of Republicans was very creative. A couple of Texas residents claimed that instead of counting the entire population when states perform redistricting, they should count only the voting-age population. Or maybe only registered voters. Or maybe some other method that grossly favors Republicans.
This case got decided today, and since the court now has only eight members, it ended up in a 4-4 tie, which is a relief for—
No, wait. The Texans lost unanimously, 8-0. That's unexpected. And to add to the bizarreness, Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the court's opinion, which was largely based on an originalist view of the Constitution and the 14th Amendment:
What constitutional history and our prior decisions strongly suggest, settled practice confirms. Adopting voter-eligible apportionment as constitutional command would upset a well-functioning approach to districting that all 50 States and countless local local jurisdictions have followed for decades, even centuries.
I guess miracles can happen after all. I don't know what the next clever assault on the voting rights of Democrats will be, but this case suggests that maybe the Supreme Court has been pushed as far as it's willing to go down this road. New strategy, please.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.