this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2023
51 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10477 readers
127 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In a 6-3 decision, SCOTUS rejected the notion that state legislatures have unlimited power to determine the rules for federal elections and draw partisan congressional maps without interference from state courts.

How much effect will this have on existing congressional maps and upcoming elections?

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] JuBe@beehaw.org 20 points 2 years ago

It’s difficult to overstate how disastrous a ruling in this case going the other way could have been, on top of the corrupting influence of large amounts of money already involved in politics and how gerrymandered districts already are.

[–] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 8 points 2 years ago

Shocking news. I fully expected them to sign democracy's death warrant.

[–] mdwhite999@vlemmy.net 5 points 2 years ago
[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 years ago

Of course the 3 opposed were the ones that were bought off by billionaires the most.

[–] trashhalo@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago
[–] not_a_king@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

who were the 3 in the 6 v 3?

[–] Cybrpwca@beehaw.org 8 points 2 years ago

Alito, Gorsuch and Thomas. Gorsuch has occasionally surprised me. Alito and Thomas can always be counted on to be horrible.

[–] noeontheend@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch.

[–] sparky@lemmy.federate.cc 4 points 2 years ago

Thank fucking god. That's all I can say.

[–] BioDriver@beehaw.org 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

As someone who lives in Texas this gives me hope that the state’s voter suppression tactics will be overturned.

[–] SirElliott@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court is still of the opinion that they cannot hear cases alleging partisan gerrymandering. This decision only means that the highest court of a state may be able to decide in matters of partisan gerrymandering within their state. With the Texas Supreme Court consisting of nine Republicans, I'm doubtful that many acts of the state legislature will be overturned even in cases of overtly partisan actions.

[–] Can_Utility@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This session has really been sort of surprising when compared with last session. The 6-3 Republican majority last year really kicked the hornet's nest, between the NY gun case and Dobbs. It seemed like now that the Court was firmly in the hands of ideologues they were just going to go YOLO and tick off every item on the right-wing wish list.

I have no way of substantiating this, but I have to wonder if the outrage that has arisen nationwide in the wake of Dobbs, along with all of the coverage of the various justices' ethical lapses, is having a similar effect as FDR's court-packing scheme had on the Court of the 1930s. His plan to add sympathetic justices to the Court to stop the string of right-wing blows against the New Deal failed, but it was a credible enough threat that it caused at least one justice to stop obstructing and allowed FDR's programs to get through unimpeded.

Could it be that the majority is so uncomfortable with the heat it's gotten the past year that they're throwing cold water on their grander ambitions? If so, let's keep up the pressure!

[–] Fauxreigner@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I don't know about "the majority", but I'm pretty sure Roberts has been twisting arms so that his legacy isn't being the chief justice who presided over the downfall of the court.

[–] Can_Utility@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Entirely possible, though it seems like he was twisting arms the last session to get his colleagues to slow down, and we all saw how that turned out. Something has shifted, and I'm not really sure what, but while the Court as a whole is decidedly right-wing, it's more chastened than the triumphalist 2021-22 session.

[–] Fauxreigner@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

I have a suspicion that the court would have left Roe at least partially intact if the draft memo hadn't leaked.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

Paywalled. But is this the state legislature theory thing?

[–] Piatun@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 2 years ago

Sounds way too good.

load more comments
view more: next ›