On January 9, a 3-judge U.S. District Court ruled that North Carolina’s U.S. House districts comprise an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. Common Cause v Rucho, m.d., 1:16cv-1026. The vote was 3-0. Judges James A. Wynn (an Obama appointee) and W. Earl Britt (a Carter appointee) wrote the majority opinion, which says that the First Amendment requires districting for partisan office to avoid any attempt to give one particular party an advantage over any other party. This is a radical conclusion that no other final decision in any other case has concluded. They also said that the “Elections Clause” (Article I, sec. 4) also forbids partisanship in redistricting. The part of the decision about the Elections Clause is on pages 175-191.
The third judge, William L. Osteen, a Bush Jr. appointee, wrote separately to say that he believes the North Carolina plan is unconstitutional because it violates the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
This case has been filed August 5, 2016, after the North Carolina legislature had redrawn the U.S. House districts. The original 2011 plan had been declared an unconstitutional racial gerrymander, so the legislature drew new districts that were then attacked as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. The state had tried to persuade the judges to stay this case until the U.S. Supreme Court hands down its decisions from Wisconsin and Maryland, but on September 8, 2017, these judges said they would not wait. They clearly intend this decision to be in time for new districts to be drawn for the 2018 election. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link. The majority opinion is 191 pages long; the Osteen decision, at the back, is 14 pages.
Proportional representation (PR) is the perfect solution for guaranteeing the fairest elections in Federal and State election questions with regard to reasonable ballot access and district sizes, and PR is the highest priority of consideration in all elections in religious, government, union and corporate governance elections.
The 10th USA Parliament has been uniting many diverse people and has been using PR efficiently, effectively and our United Coalition and Unity Platform has had the highest levels of perfection, teamwork and dynamics in working models in pure proportional representation in elections since 1995.
Become part of the team by signing up, bring your team and help build on the unity phenomena that’s sweeping the globe.
Build now with team players, get things done in business and politics, in new advanced ways that are high in team spirit and which are like nothing that you’ve ever known before:
http://www.usparliament.org/signup.php
What James said. And, if the majority judges’ ruling holds up, PR might be deemed the best solution.
One more perversion of the 1st Amdt by 2 of 3.
Some sanity by Osteen, Jr. — EPC in 14 Amdt, Sec.1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Carolina%27s_congressional_districts
More scary looking pack/crack gerrymander districts.
Oh, the NYT totally buries the lede on its write-up. Doesn’t even mention the 1A angle.
Wasted about 2 hours speed scanning the JUNK opinions (full of cherry-picked words from earlier JUNK opinions)
— the 2 hacks opinion was de facto written by Donkey HQ in Devil City.
What *efficiency gap* percentage is allowed ???
At least some mention of packing and cracking– pp 93-97
ZERO mention of 1/2 or less votes x 1/2 rigged districts = 1/4 or less CONTROL
— due to math MORON lawyers for plaintiffs and all 3 math MORON judges.
The USA is now quite ready for Civil WAR 2 when the NC case gets to SCOTUS (as it will shortly).
***
PR and AppV – regardless of ALL the morons in gerrymander cases since 1776 —
and the political felons making the communist/fascist concentration camp gerrymander areas — Fed, State and Local.
Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm P. 91
More New Age perversion stuff — never known by 1787 and 1866 folks.
2016 NC USA REPS ELECTION
13 PACK/CRACK GERRYMANDER DISTRICTS
IE — 13 CONCENTRATION CAMPS
VOTES PCT
1,427,698 *30.1 7 LOW R WIN
672,715 14.2 3 HIGH R WIN
2,100,413 44.3 10 R WIN
754,156 15.9 3 D WIN
2,854,569 60.2 13 ALL WIN
346,913 7.3 3 R LOSE
1,388,505 29.3 10 D LOSE
8,471 0.2 1 OTHER LOSE
1,743,889 36.8 14 ALL LOSE
4,598,458 97.0 SUBTOTAL
143,106 3.0 NONVOTES
4,741,564 100.0 PRESIDENT VOTES
* ANTI-DEMOCRACY MINORITY RULE PERCENTAGE
MEMO-
2,447,326 51.6 13 ALL R
2,142,661 45.2 13 ALL D
DATA – FEC, FEDERAL ELECTIONS 2016
THE ABOVE IS THE SAME MATH IN ALL STATES WITH MULTIPLE GERRYMANDER AREAS – FED, STATE, LOCAL.
—
PR AND APPV
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/09/us/north-carolina-gerrymander.html
ONE OF MANY STORIES ON THE MESS.
The State of North Carolina is required by existing federal law effectively to create majority-minority districts. One of which I used to live in in Eastern North Carolina, currently represented by G.K. Butterfield. There’s another out west that travelled along the interstate from Greensboro down toward Charlotte.
If the feds want the state to not have a gerrymandered map that benefits Republicans, they need to cease the federal requirement of supermajority Democratic districts based on a race definition.
rj — separate set of CORRUPT MORON SCOTUS opinions having a TOTAL perversion of the 15th Amdt and the 1965 racist so-called Voting Rights Act
— having racist packed gerrymander districts to get racist results.
I don’t understand why the LWV has standing. The decision say:
“The League, for example, seeks to educate voters regarding a fair and evenhanded democracy, which includes redistricting. The 2016 Plan has required the League to increase those educational efforts and therefore forced the League to incur additional costs.”
While the LWV has a 1st Amendment right to disseminate information about policies that it perceives as “fair” and “evenhanded”, it has no right to compel a state to adopt those policies.
How does one apply uniform swing to a precinct that votes 97% Democratic? Can you get to 103% even if the dead vote?
Voting in North Carolina is extremely skewed toward Democrats at a precinct level. What the judges want is drawing in Republican-leaning precincts with heavily Democratic precincts.
North Carolina should draw districts with relatively equal citizen voting age populations. It is absurd to claim that the Elections Clause apply and then to not base electoral districts on those who may lawfully vote.
They should also eliminate the stupid requirement for exact equality of congressional districts. Justice Brennan when he was analyzing the Judgment of Solomon probably thought he understood the case, until the judge let the hysterical woman intervene. He might have also mused that modern technology such as lasers would be improvement over swords. Exact equality is not a traditional redistricting criteria.
With a more reasonable limit, districts can largely be based on whole counties. In North Carolina, it is likely that only Wake and Mecklenburg counties need to be divided. Let anyone submit a map that has reasonable equality, and splits the fewest counties possible. Then let an Ordinary Decent Citizens Commission determine which map is used. The ODCC would include 1000s of voters selected at random from throughout the state. Only lawyers and politicians would be excluded. It is possible that convicted felons would be permitted to participate.
A member of the ODCC would be given a set of maps showing the district that they would be placed in under each map. They would rank their district, which would then be their ranking for that plan. If voters have the right to select their representatives, they have the right to select the district for their representative. Someone in Kinston has no business dictating the districts in Asheville, other than any necessary coordination.
The plans would be ranked based on Condorcet, and the most preferred chosen.
SCOTUS
No. 17A745 — Application for stay
Title:
Robert A. Rucho, et al., Applicants
v.
Common Cause, et al.