Published: Thu, June 20, 2019
Global News | By Blake Casey

Supreme Court dismisses challenge to Virginia gerrymandering ruling

Supreme Court dismisses challenge to Virginia gerrymandering ruling

Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring said in a statement that Monday's Supreme Court ruling is a win for democracy.

The justices' 5-4 decision Monday was perhaps telegraphed by the fact they previously allowed election planning to go forward using the map.

Currently, Republicans maintain thin majorities in both chambers-51 to 49 in the House of Delegates and 21 to 19 in the Senate.

Last week Virginia held its primary election for the state's House of Delegates. Indeed, Ginsburg noted, even if Virginia had given the House of Delegates the power to represent the state, the House of Delegates never indicated in the lower court that it was doing so; instead, "the House has purported to represent its own interests" throughout the case. Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision dismissed a Virginia House Republican challenge to the redrawing of House of Delegates maps in a gerrymandering case that appeared to be a victory for Democratic state lawmakers.

She used to be joined by two of the court docket's diversified liberals, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, however also by two of the court docket's most conservative members, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch.

Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez Has a Message for Democrats After 'Boy Bye' Tweet
It is the conclusion of expert analysis", she posted on Twitter , linking to an article by Esquire . The former waitress is from NY , her family roots are in the USA territory of Puerto Rico.

Justice Ginsburg carried the other 3 votes of the plurality and affirmed in the judgment, but would have affirmed only on the rationality that the state law in question does not conflict with the AEA because it regulates only private mining within the boundaries of a particular state. They claimed that the Republican lawmakers who drew the old map intentionally put black residents into some districts so that the surrounding ones could be mostly white Republicans. "The invalidation of the House's redistricting plan and its replacement with a court-ordered map would cause the House to suffer a "concrete" injury" and give it grounds for bringing an appeal. "One House of its bicameral legislature can not alone continue the litigation against the will of its partners in the legislative process", Ginsburg wrote. Republican incumbents in six of those districts will find it more hard to defend their seats against Democratic challengers this November, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Virginia Public Access Project. After the state legislature did not adopt a remedial plan, the district court appointed a special master to draft one. But Virginia law makes clear, Ginsburg emphasized, that only the state's attorney general has the authority to represent the state in civil litigation.

Adam Kincaid of the National Republican Redistricting Trust said the court decision "will reverberate across the states, touching virtually every area of politically charged law".

The court has never found that politics have so infected a redistricting process that voters' constitutional rights were violated. "Those new maps are already in use", The Hill reported. They are due to rule in those cases by the end of this month. Republicans hold a two-seat majority in the House of Delegates which the revised district lines imperiled in the state's off-year elections this November (placing six GOP incumbents in majority-Democratic districts).

While voting rights advocates and Democrats in Virginia praised the court's ruling Monday, experts cautioned that because of the unusual split of justices and the majority's explanation for its decision, the development does not necessarily foreshadow similar conclusions for upcoming rulings in other gerrymandering cases.

Like this: