“The Supreme Court takes on two redistricting cases from Texas”
Steven Mazie for The Economist.
Category Archives: Supreme Court
Roundup of Stories on SCOTUS Decision to Hear Texas Redistricting Cases
“Will the Court Kill the Gerrymander?”
Zachary Roth for the NYRB.
“Arguments in Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute – What’s a state to do?”
David Becker:
So again, Justice Breyer’s question reflects what states have been going through with regard to list maintenance. Despite the false choice often presented by partisans, states don’t want a list maintenance procedure that’s overbroad, leading to false positives… Continue reading
Analysis: Supreme Court Agrees to Hear (Part of) Texas Redistricting Cases, But Not Partisan Gerrymandering; What Does It Mean, and What About North Carolina?
As expected, the Supreme Court today agreed to hear both the state and congressional Texas redistricting cases, consolidating them, postponing a decision on jurisdiction (more on that below), and likely (but not certainly) setting them up for argument in… Continue reading
Likely Coming Friday: A Supreme Court Order to Hear the Texas Redistricting Cases
Tomorrow is one of the last opportunities for the Supreme Court to set cases to be argued this term, which ends in late June. Last week during its private conference the Court considered whether or not to hear the state… Continue reading
The State of Play on Partisan Gerrymandering Cases at the Supreme Court
There has been so much action on partisan gerrymandering recently, I thought it is worth gaming out what is likely to happen over the next few months in relation to a number of cases at, or heading, to SCOTUS.
Back… Continue reading
“Podcast: Gerrymandering and American democracy”
National Constitution Center:
In the Gill case this year, the Supreme Court might determine the constitutional future of partisan gerrymandering.
Scholars and advocates have been discussing the arguments at the heart of the case – as well as those involved… Continue reading
“Two Ways of Looking at Gerrymandering”
Linda Greenhouse contrasting Benisk and Gill.
I did my own compare and contrast of the cases last month in the LA Times.
Supreme Court May Decide The First Week in January to Set Texas Redistricting Cases for Argument
Congressional docket.
State case.
Given that the Court has already issued a stay in each of these cases it is almost certain the Court will set them for argument, with a result likely this term.
This means we… Continue reading
Gorsuch Sent Fawning Letter to Trump When Trump Questioned His Loyalty During Nominations Process
WaPo:
Trump was especially upset by what he viewed as Gorsuch’s insufficient gratitude for a lifetime appointment to the nation’s highest court, White House officials said. The judge sent the president a handwritten letter dated March 2, thanking him for… Continue reading
“Is the Supreme Court finally ready to tackle partisan gerrymandering? Signs suggest yes”
I have written this oped for the LA Times. A snippet:
Maybe there is some technical problem with the Gill case — such as a lack of standing for the plaintiffs — that would prevent the court from deciding it… Continue reading
Maybe Justice Kennedy is Reading Ned Foley on Why the Maryland Redistricting Case is a Better One Than Wisconsin?
Just a reminder that Ned’s piece upcoming in the blockbuster William and Mary Law Review symposium on gerrymandering makes the case for Justice Kennedy to use the Maryland case (which the Court just agreed to hear) rather than the Wisconsin… Continue reading
Breaking: Supreme Court Surprisingly Adds SECOND Partisan Gerrymandering Case to Its Calendar This Term, This One from Maryland
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a partisan gerrymandering case from Maryland, Benisek v. Lamone. (As with the Wisconsin gerrymandering case, Gill v. Whitford, the Court has postponed the question of jurisdiction as it agreed to… Continue reading