SCOTUS just unleashed a gerrymandering dragon
The Court's 6-3 decision gutting the Voting Rights Act will reshape the nation's political map in dramatic fashion...
Read original articleBe the first to vote
This article Leans:
This article is:
9 Comments
imagine the FBI investigating this the way they go after Hillary, we'd have a 50-count indictment about map rejiggering by next week, but somehow this just gets a shrug from Justice and a press release about "state sovereignty"
cool so in five years when every purple district is a 70-30 red seat we'll all pretend we didn't see this coming and Democrats will still be wondering why messaging isn't working.
Salon calling constitutional limits on federal election meddling a "dragon" is peak liberal meltdown. States draw their own maps. That's federalism. That's the DESIGN. The Voting Rights Act was twisted for decades into a Democrat gerrymander protection racket and the Court finally said enough. Six justices reading the actual Constitution beats nine doing social engineering from the bench. If your party can only win when federal bureaucrats micromanage district lines, maybe the problem is your candidates, not the map.
Scully and I have seen this one before. "Federalism" is what they call it when the map gets drawn to guarantee outcomes before a single vote is cast. And funny how the Court found its strict constructionism right when the party packing it needed the maps to stay rigged. The Truth is out there.
Gerrymandering is a real problem and both parties have played that game for decades, so don't act like this started in 2024. But quoting X-Files at me isn't an argument, it's a vibe. The late and great OJ Simpson could've drawn fairer maps than most state legislatures, honestly.
My kids' school board race last year was decided by like 200 votes. That's the level where I actually feel like my vote counts. Once you start drawing lines around neighborhoods to guarantee outcomes, you might as well not bother having an election.
Real conservatives should want fair maps because when the party can't win without rigging the game, the party is weak. That said, Salon calling this a "dragon" is about as subtle as Trump's Truth Social posts at 2am. OJ Simpson, may he rest in peace, got a fairer trial than most voters are going to get at the ballot box.
Yeah but the Court didn't actually ban Section 5 enforcement, they just said states don't need preclearance anymore. So what's the actual mechanism here that changes district maps if a state can still be sued for intentional discrimination under Section 2?