Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Davidsog
The largest problem is the definition of a voting district varies so widely. It runs the gamut from adhering to existing administrative boundaries to including political homogeneity to political diversity. IMHO, the Supreme Court failed the American People in its job by not taking the opportunity to establish a single definition in Gill vs Whitford.
|
I'd suggest that the Supreme Court really fails where it attempts to adjudicate intra-state political disputes that are essentially non-justiciable.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by majority opinion in Vieth, 2004
We conclude that neither Article I, §2, nor the Equal Protection Clause, nor (what appellants only fleetingly invoke) Article I, §4, provides a judicially enforceable limit on the political considerations that the States and Congress may take into account when districting.
|
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2003/02-1580
It's awful that the VA legislature has chosen to violate an incorporated federal right. I'd want to see any of those bills defeated, and if passed, stricken when challenged.
Having federal judges make state redistricting decisions based on criteria present in no constitutional text isn't a good way to defend the force of constitutional text.
Gerrymandering isn't the cause of these repellant proposed restrictions, but is an effect of democrat dominance of the state legislature when it mattered. Part of the problem of representative government is that it represents people with terrible ideas.