On March 20, the U.S. Supreme Court accepted an amicus brief in the Texas congressional redistricting case. Since the oral argument has already been held, this acceptance of a brief is extraordinarily rare. The brief points out that the Georgia legislature passed a bill in January 2006, adjusting the State Senate boundaries of just three districts, and that the motive for this was to help one particular candidate (who is the brother-in-law of the incumbent, who is retiring). Specifically, the new boundaries exclude the residence of the strongest Democrat in the open district, so he can’t run for that seat. The brief points out that if the Court permits mid-decade redistricting for partisan reasons, this behavior will become common. The brief also points out that the bill wasn’t signed by Georgia’s Republican Governor until a few hours after the oral argument was over, on March 1. Thanks to Rick Hasen for this news.
I hope the court takes action on this issue. It seems like here in Georgia that the state legislature is changing the redrawing the districts every year
I dont think the Texas redistricting case is the same at all. When the first redistriction by the legislator was thrown out by the courts, the courts came up with their own districts.
The districts are supposed to be created by the legislative branch of government, not the courts.
The second redistricting by the legislators is the legislators assurting their rights to draw the districts.
Seen in this light, what they are doing apears reasonable.
The minority party will not believe it is so reasonable, which is why they left the state to avoid a valid vote.
It is an interesting question to see if a courts districting will be forced to stand by other Judges. This would change the balance of power to Judges, not elected legislators.
I am not commenting, nor do I know if the new districts are fair. I don’t live in Texas either. This case can affect the whole country.