On March 5, the Pennsylvania League of Women Voters, the lead plaintiff in the state court case that challenged Pennsylvania’s U.S. House districts, filed this brief in the U.S. Supreme Court. Turzai v League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania. The League again argues that the State Supreme Court had the authority to strike down the old U.S. House districts under the State Constitution. Thanks to Thomas Jones for the link.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/17a909.html
Also – other briefs by the usual suspects on both gerrymander gangster sides
1/2 or less votes x 1/2 rigged gerrymander districts = 1/4 or less CONTROL
IE — Donkey communist CONTROL or Elephant fascist CONTROL
— in the minority rule USA gerrymander House of Reps.
— which is the gerrymander model for ALL 99 gerrymander houses of the 50 State legislatures and many, many local legis bodies.
The whole mess will be a gerrymander model / master plot in other States
— get the local court to do last minute gerrymanders
— then claim it is to late to make any changes – or have any appeals.
Everybody ready for Civil WAR II ??? —
with killers-enslavers on both sides — this time around.
—
PR and AppV
I normally applaud the League of Women Voters, and I’m with them on this issue. However, they deserve to be called out for the behavior of their Pittsburgh affiliate related to the special election for the 18th district. The League Sponsored a debate and only invited the Republican and Democratic candidates, and failed to invite the Libertarian candidate, Drew Gray Miller. The League’s stated reason was that Mr. Miller filed his candidacy too late, but Mr. Miller’s twitter feed clearly shows that he was approved for the ballot 10(!) days prior to the date that the Republican candidate, Mr. Saccone was approved for the ballot. They were clearly caught in a lie on this. I guess even the League can be corrupted by the failed two party system.
PA USA REPS
2016 ELECTION
18 CRACKED / PACKED / RIGGED GERRYMANDER DISTRICTS
= 18 CONCENTRATION CAMPS
VOTES PCT
2,020,542 *32.8 10 LOW R WIN
764,255 12.4 + 3 HIGH R WIN
2,784,797 45.2 = 13 R WIN
1,220,648 19.8 + 5 D WIN
4,005,445 65.0 = 18 WIN
311,779 5.1 4 R LOSE
1,404,509 22.8 + 11 D LOSE
40,819 0.7 + 21 OTHER LOSE
1,757,107 28.5 = 36 LOSE
5,762,552 93.5 54 TOTAL
402,926 6.5 + NONVOTES
6,165,478 100.0 = 2016 PRESIDENT
* ANTI-DEMOCRACY MINORITY RULE PERCENT
MEMO
3096576 50.2 17 R – 1 NO R
2625157 42.6 16 D – 2 NO D
—
DATA- FEC, FEDERAL ELECTIONS 2016
https://transition.fec.gov/general/FederalElections2016.shtml
REPS, PP. 160-163
PRES, P. 7
———–
SAME EVIL ROTTED ANTI-DEMOCRACY MINORITY RULE GERRYMANDER MATH IN ALL STATES — SINCE 1776 [STATES]-1788 [USA].
—
PR and AppV
Strong brief. The estoppel argument is especially damning to the Republicans’ case.
TomP, if the info you share is accurate about the exclusion of the Libertarian candidate then that is extremely disappointing.
Here is a link to Mr. Miller’s Twitter feed. The tweets are from February 23, 2018, so you’ll have to scroll down a bit.
https://twitter.com/DrewGrayMiller
Even if the state court has primacy, they must exercise that authority lawfully. No?
At the time the court issued it per curiam order on January 22, it was unknown that the Supreme Court would take 16 of the 18 days allotted for the legislature to propose a plan.
The January 22 order said that the 2011 plan was unconstitutional, but clearly does not indicate what was unconstitutional. It said that if the legislature submitted a plan that complied with the requirements of the Pennsylvania Constitution, it should do so by February 9. It went on to say “opinion to follow”.
That opinion was not issued until February 7.
How much required time is specified in any constitution for *due process* ???
Again – new gerrymander schemes are now possible in 0.1 second or less —
variables
past voting results and Census populations per precinct
precinct connections in local govts
local govt connections in each county
county connections in State
>>> gerrymander computerized child’s play.
—
PR and AppV
The 2011 Elephant scheme basically ONLY used the —
past voting results and Census populations per precinct variable —
ie ignored local govts and counties [unless pro-Elephants good for packing/cracking]
The PA SCT Donkeys ordered some attention to the —
precinct connections in local govts
local govt connections in each county
county connections in State.
—
PR and AppV