On June 4, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in the wedding cake case, Masterpiece Cakeshop v Colorado Civil Rights Commission, 16-111. As Rick Hasen points out, the decision turned on the fact that one of the members of the governmental body that had penalized the baker make comments showing bias against religion. Hasen writes here that this principle could influence the pending lawsuits on gerrymandering. Some legislators, who have voted for gerrymanders, have expressed the viewpoint that they are deliberately creating a gerrymander in order to hurt the other major party.
Similarly, when the Green and Constitution Parties were suing Tennessee over its severe rules for new political party access to the ballot, the party’s attorney tried to present evidence that the Tennessee legislators who had voted against bills easing the requirement had openly said in committee that they wanted to keep minor parties off the ballot. But the U.S. District Court Judge who was hearing the case refused to allow that information into the record. The Masterpiece Cakeshop precedent will be helpful in future ballot access cases, when there is evidence of state legislators’ intent.
SCOTUS hacks are lunatic —
OK to ignore comments in legislative bodies in speeches/debates and legis reports.
Only 5 of 9 SCOTUS hacks have the power to decipher the *real* meaning of words
— in the USA Const, laws and treaties.
The rest of us are 1 day old babies.
All the statist govt folks are more and more immune — legis – exec – judic.
Just more stuff on the long road to Am Rev WAR II ???
This is an article by BAN which explains that the US Supreme Court cannot add additional items of consideration in cases such as comments.
It’s a typical problem with pluralist committees to be restricted from many multiples of alternatives.
The United Coalition doesn’t have the decision-making problems that pluralists committees like the Supreme Court are stuck with, the United Coalition has been using the advanced decision-making mathematics of pure proportional representation (PPR) for more than 23 consecutive years and PPR works perfectly.
Write-in names, write-in political party names and write-in decision-items are three areas where our team will excel and we’re starting all over on June 6th, 2018. By July 8th our team’s abilities will be exploring the structure of decision-making and we’re transforming to new levels of improvements never seen by using parliamentary procedures under PPR.
By demonstrating great teamwork we set new example that help others make changes which nurture 100% perfection.
http://www.allpartysystem.com
Richard, I usually agree with you, but my belief is that there is NO REASON to show intent. When it comes to Gerrymandering, all that matters is the EFFECT. Intent may well be secret, and showing it a burden to those whom the law excludes from having votes counted. To be fair, it is the effect, not the intent that matters.
Regardless of the MORON SCOTUS —
*state of mind* regarding *intent* is a FACT question —
Did such and such happen *intentionally* or merely *negligently*.
Most serious in Homicide cases– first degree murder or manslaughter (if illegal)
or justifiable (if legal).
In civil cases (including ALL election law cases)
— relates to $$$ damages —
intentional >>> punitive $$$ damages
negligent >>> regular $$$ damages.
— ballot access, voting, counting votes, etc.
6 and 7 Amdts are there for LONG legal history reasons.
@Casey Peters,
How do you measure effect?
The State HACKS will get DEATH COMMAND ORDERS from the D/R HQ in Devil City to SAY and WRITE Z-E-R-O FROM NOW ONWARD (ie FOREVER] about what ANY AND all gerrymanders MAY/SHALL/MIGHT DO.
— JUST LIKE THE DEATH OATHS IN THE VARIOUS MAFIA GANGS — OR IN THE AXIS POWER REGIMES IN WW II.
JR — EFFECT — FOR ZILLIONETH TIME —
1/2 OR LESS VOTES X 1/2 GERRYMANDER DISTRICTS = 1/4 OR LESS CONTROL = OLIGARCHY
— WITH MUCH WORSE PRIMARY MATH – ESP IF NO INCUMBENT HACK IN PRIMARY
ESTIMATED 5-15 PERCENT REAL OLIGARCH CONTROL —
ALWAYS TENDING TO TYRANT MONARCH CONTROL — I.E. STALIN/HITLER TYPE KILLERS.
THE USA IS GERRYMANDER ROTTED NOW LIKE THE LATE ROMAN REPUBLIC IN 120 BC – 27 BC —
R.R. DESTRUCTION BY THE KILLER EMPEROR AUGUSTUS CAESAR.
—-
PR AND APPV
No need to argue. We should find out shortly what the Supremes have to say about gerrymandering.
Jim, You measure effect by determining the actual votes versus the political parties of the politicians elected. Often they are quite different. Of course, there is variation of belief in any party, but people run in one part or another because of a general belief system that the party allegedly represents. When the results of an election significantly deviate from what the voters want, why hold elections at all? — Casey