On March 28, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Benisek v Lamone, 17-333. Here is the 81-page transcript. The issue is the Maryland U.S. House redistricting plan adopted in 2011, which is perceived by virtually everyone as a gerrymander to help Democrats.
Here is the AP article describing the hearing.
ATTENTION
9 SCOTUS MATH MORONS —
1/2 OR LESS VOTES X 1/2 RIGGED GERRYMANDER DISTRICTS = 1/4 OR LESS CONTROL = ANTI-DEMOCRACY OLIGARCHS IN CONTROL — WITH MONARCH GANG BOSS ALWAYS LURKING — FOR 6,000 PLUS YEARS.
HOW ALSO MATH S-T-U-P-I-D ARE THE KNOW-IT-ALL BRAIN DEAD SUPER-MORON MEDIA ???
*MODERN* gerrymanders — date from English House of Commons in 1200s
— a mere 700 plus years of gerrymander oligarchs making the gangster laws to tax the poor to keep them poor and make the rich richer.
——–
PR AND APPV
I don’t think the 1st Amendment is the proper basis. The Supremes are entirely capable of (re-) construing the case as one of one-man-one-vote and put all the states on notice that extreme gerrymanders are out.
Let’s back up. Through the ’60s, county and municipal lines predominated for districts. Then came the one-man-one-vote ruling, motivated by the disenfranchisement of African Americans and over-representation of rural voters. The percent deviation from equal population per district was tightened up at the expense of allowing county and municipal lines to be crossed.
Then came the Voting Rights Act and tortured efforts to assemble majority minority districts.
As ink blot districts turned into fractile districts, as segments of districts came to be connected by the median strips of highways and by lines submerged underwater connecting widely separated land masses, the possibilities unleashed by one-man-one-vote became clear.
Plus, VRA districts have become obsolete.
In theory, state laws mandating compact districts and such can be (and have been invoked). I don’t know if Maryland has such a law. But, the Supreme Court should look for a Constitutional hook to hang this hat upon.
Having said all the above, some form of run-off election should be used for single-member districts as in Ireland and Australia.
SEE THE BOOK —
SOURCES OF OUR LIBERTIES EDITED BY RICHARD L. PERRY (AMERICAN BAR ASSN, 1959) —
1215-1789 Legal history Background of 1-8 Amdts —
BEFORE SCOTUS WENT N-U-T-S IN THE 1960s.
1 Amdt has ZERO to do with election *mechanics* — ballot access, etc. —
one of NUTS cases — Williams v Rhodes 1968
— bringing up the 1st Amdt. — 50 years of SCOTUS morons.