During this week, I posted some great contributions from a number of important election law voices on the future of partisan gerrymandering after the Supreme Court’s opinion in Rucho. Thanks to all for participating!

Here are the posts:

Michael Solimine: State Courts as Forums for Federal Partisan Gerrymandering Claims after Common Cause v. Rucho (Rucho Symposium)

Ned Foley: Blame the Constitution, Not the Court (Rucho Symposium)

Joey Fishkin: Rucho: A Sinkhole Dangerously Close to the House (Rucho symposium)

Deborah Hellman: Partisan Gerrymandering and Campaign Finance: An interesting relationship (Rucho symposium)

Nick Stephanopoulos: The Denouement of Kennedy’s Retirement (Rucho Symposium)

Bruce Cain: Back to Institutional Basics (Rucho Symposium)

Franita Tolson: Taking the Elections Clause Seriously after Rucho v. Common Cause (Rucho symposium)

Sam Issacharoff: When Constraint Fails (Rucho Symposium)

Tam Cho: For Partisan Gerrymandering, an Ounce of Prevention is Worth a Pound of Cure (Rucho Symposium)

Keith Gaddie: After Rucho: Fifty Thickets (Rucho Symposium)

Rick Pildes: What Do Voters Think Independent Redistricting Commissions Should Do? (Rucho Symposium)

Justin Levitt: The Soft Bigotry of Low Legislative Expectations (Rucho Symposium)

Mike Parsons: Rucho’s Antidemocratic Instinct: “This is not law.” (Rucho Symposium)

Michael Morley: Rucho, Legal Fictions, and the Judicial Models of Voters (Rucho Symposium)

Guy Charles and Luis Fuentes-Rohwer: Rucho: Democracy and Banality (Rucho symposium)

Moon Duchin: How to Reason from the Universe of Maps (The Normative Logic of Map Sampling) (Rucho symposium)

Rebecca Green: A Spade is a Spade (Rucho Symposium)

Sam Wang: Resolving the proportional representation problem for state courts (Rucho Symposium)