The subhead from ProPublica: The Wisconsin case before the Supreme Court claims to be about partisanship. But race is a factor in this case and many others nationwide. A few briefs in Gill (including one on behalf of law … Continue reading

Over at National Review, Jay Cost asks the Court to leave redress of gerrymandering to the political process. When the cause of action is a complaint that adherents of a plausible majority party have been intentionally and durably prevented… Continue reading

Missed this on Thursday: The NAACP has filed a FOIA case to get records about preparations for the 2020 Census.

John Myers for the LA Times, with a little history.

Asher Steinberg blogs up a storm. And the Detroit Free Press highlights Eric Lander’s brief and the role of science.

It’s a day full of would-be reminders for Democrats, for some reason.  Jeff Greenfield points out that Democrats have lost races for reasons other than gerrymandering.  I’m not sure anyone disagrees.

This is yet another article attempting to explain Gill away by saying that the cause of the gerrymandering problem is natural concentration of Democrats in urban areas. The challenge in Gill, of course, is limited to those plans in which… Continue reading

Wisconsin partisan gerrymandering case had, by far, most amicus briefs of any SCOTUS case since 2013. https://t.co/VyJCBUVGqL #fairmaps pic.twitter.com/Bi7Eys9XvD — Michael Li 李之樸 (@mcpli) October 7, 2017

A post from Jordan Ellenberg, in the weekend NYT. FWIW, I’m hardly a Luddite, but I’m a little skeptical of the gerrymandering-and-technology story, at least in its strongest form.  It is unquestionably true that technology has democratized both gerrymandering… Continue reading

Politifact says otherwise.

Mike Parsons on an exchange prompted by Justice Sotomayor. Rick Esenberg says the court should just stay out entirely. CNN talks about the cameras that weren’t inside. And Eric McGhee, who claims the much-discussed “efficiency gap” as his own, blogs … Continue reading