Will Texas redistricting stand up in court?
By on Dec 12th, 2005 at 1:49 pm
Will Texas redistricting stand up in court?
According to this Justice Dept. memo, chances aren’t good. The memo states that the “plan failed to pass muster under each and every factor the Supreme Court has established for gauging whether or not a redistricting plan will reduce minority electoral opportunity.” (Via Kos)
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Hoffman
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
I spent some eleven years in Texas, BD: before DeLay!!
December 12th, 2005 at 2:01 pmWhy should the Dubya and his friends care about laws…
1. Texas Rangers use government to defeat citizens.
The property acquired so cheaply by the Rangers includes not just a fancy new stadium with a seating capacity of 49,000 but an additional 270 acres of newly valuable land. Legislation is passed and signed that authorizes the Arlington Sports Facilities Development Authority with power to issue bonds and exercise eminent domain over any obstinate landowners. Never before had a Texas municipal authority been given the license to seize the property of a private citizen for the benefit of other private citizens.
http://www.alternet.org/story/23351
2. Oh yeah, Dubya doesn’t care about other countries laws either.
1. US Embassy proposal violates community zoning.
Decision to move embassy spurs political probe
Complaints of undue pressure on Oslo City Council members are prompting an investigation into the council’s surprise decision last week, by the slimmest of majorities, to move the US Embassy to a new, disputed location.
Tom Pape broke out of the Oslo Labour Party’s voting group and went along with the Americans’ request to build a new embassy at a disputed site.
http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article1177613.ece
December 12th, 2005 at 2:05 pmso, it sounds like it should pass through without a problem under this thoroughly absolutely corrupted regime
December 12th, 2005 at 2:06 pmThis is the link on the Ranger Stadium.
http://bushwatch.org/family.htm
December 12th, 2005 at 2:07 pmI look forward to watching how Roberts performs on this one. He’s had conservative opinions thus far, but within the bounds of reasonable interpretations (with which I happen to disagree) of the law, I feel. To please the right on this one, though, he’d have to really abandon any pretense of impartiality. So it will be interesting to see.
I think I’ve kind of come to the conclusion that I’m excited for whatever happens to this country, because it will be an exciting time regardless. Maybe that’s wrong.
December 12th, 2005 at 2:15 pmThis is very important, esp to those of us in Travis County (Austin), who are now “represented” in Congress by Lamar Smith, who lives in San Antonio. In fact, the entire thing was designed to decimate the Travis County voting block and gain “our” seat for the GOP. The Democratic stronghold here (including some 80,000 University of Texas students) now has no representation on the federal level. They don’t even bother to answer letters.
December 12th, 2005 at 2:22 pmI guess we will find out if those scrotums on the SCOTUS are “judicial activists” after all. They were in 2000 in Bush v. Gore.
December 12th, 2005 at 2:24 pmif it doesn’t hold up, shouldn’t everything that has taken place as a result be undone? meaning, redistricted districts redistricted, and elections re-held? if it wasn’t constitutional from the outset, the post-re-D results should be nullified…
December 12th, 2005 at 2:36 pmThat was my question is if this if found to be wrong does it all get undone? and does anyone get punished for their disregard of the law? If not the bad guys win regarless and there is no reason for them not to do it agian.
December 12th, 2005 at 3:09 pmTexas deserves better than what they have gotten out of these bums. Pray for a better Texas and repent, for the time of redemption is near. By the way, Shrub, Dubya, whatever you want to call him ain’t from Texas.
December 12th, 2005 at 3:13 pm#10
We would all be better if DUHbya was from Washington, DC—as far away from Washington as we can get him. Leavenworth, Kansas would work just fine
December 12th, 2005 at 4:13 pmI think the entire lot of this administration should have to serve life in the desert with the old warden that serves rotten balogna sandwiches…..
December 12th, 2005 at 4:19 pmThe Texas redistricting mess is no different than any other Republican dirty trick. They have a sufficient majority in this state to ride roughshod over anyone in their way and they don’t care who they hurt. The sad thing is the people pushing this travesty (redistricting) suffer the delusion that they deserve the control because they are rich and therefore “better” people than anyone else. This is another example of the elitism that is the reality of the Republican Party, a party that often points to the Democrats and accuses them of the same thing. The truth is, they are just arrogant and crude. The sooner we can ride them out of the state on a rail the better. We need a good old-fashioned populist to spring from the ranks of the Democrats and fire the party up.
December 12th, 2005 at 5:42 pmSo the SCOTUS with Roberts and maybe even Alito will determine whether Delay acted illegally? I won’t be holding my breath. What do they have to lose? That we will be unhappy at their “interpretation” of the Constitution? Who will begin a movement to impeach a justice? The same people who will begin a movement to impeach Bush/Cheney?
December 12th, 2005 at 5:54 pmThere is no checks/balance system in place today. One party controls everything, and there is no reason to believe they will not rule in their and their party’s favor.
Here is a great one if you have the time. enjoy
December 12th, 2005 at 8:14 pmhttp://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/17BUSH.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5090&en=890a96189e162076&ex=1255665600&partner=rssuserland
First off, Lamar Smith has represented a large part of Travis County (Austin)for some years prior to the “evil” redistricting of 2003. Travis County is too large for one district and too small for two districts within it under the idea of “one man, one vote.”
December 12th, 2005 at 9:22 pmAs to the other specifics of the map, Texas now has 3 majority African American districts, which is roughly proportional to the percentage of African Americans in the state. I don’t believe any other state in the country achieves that, but I’m not entirely sure on that one. I do know that no state does better on that point.
Also, Texas increased the number of performing Hispanic districts by at least one in the 2003 map (Two, if you count Gene Green’s. His Hispanic ratio went up to where it could probably be considered a performing Hispanic district if it wasn’t before – an arguable point). Doggett’s new district (CD 25) is performing by every measure. Remember, performance is a measure of the voters’ desires, not the color of the Congressman, and the Hispanic voters in that district voted for him in the primary and in the general.
In addition, no one but lawyers for white Democrat incumbents has ever said that “coalition” districts are in any way protected. If they had been, ALL Democrat districts except Stenholm’s would have been protected simply because they are Democrat districts. That’s ludicrous on it’s face.
I would need to study the numbers, but I believe there are now more Anglos in performing Hispanic districts, than Hispanics in majority Anglo districts.
Finally, we live in a democracy. Staff (even DoJ voting rights section staff) do not make decisions; they make recommendations. There was never any intention to “insulate” Section 5 decisions from political appointees who are to represent the wishes of those whom the people have elected. If you disagree with those decisions, publicize the “evil” nature of them and elect those who will not make them.
CORRECTION:
December 12th, 2005 at 10:19 pmThe three African American districts are not majority African American districts (one has a majority voting age population), but are performing African American districts due to the fact that African American voters control the Democratic primary and they are overwhelmingly Democrat districts election whoever is nominated in the Democrat primary.
Trolls? You don’t really win when you cheat. And, like most who cheat, you will be found out eventually. Truth usually does out itself. And how about Diebold? Again, cheating is wrong.
December 13th, 2005 at 11:19 amI’m new to this: what’s a troll? I assume you are talking about me, but not knowing the lingo, I can’t be sure.
December 13th, 2005 at 9:05 pm[...] Supreme Court justices “signaled” yesterday “that they were likely to uphold the partisan-charged, mid-decade Texas redistricting plan” engineered by criminally indicted Rep, Tom DeLay (R-TX), despite the fact that the Justice Department found the plan would likely “reduce minority electoral opportunity.” [...]
March 2nd, 2006 at 9:10 am