RSN Fundraising Banner
Supreme Court Turns Away Pennsylvania Electoral Map Dispute
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=44703"><span class="small">Andrew Chung, Reuters</span></a>   
Tuesday, 30 October 2018 12:50

Chung writes: "The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rebuffed a bid by Republican legislators in Pennsylvania to reinstate a congressional district map struck down by that state’s top court as unlawfully biased in favor of Republicans."

A man points to a Congressional district map of boundaries in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. (photo: WBUR)
A man points to a Congressional district map of boundaries in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. (photo: WBUR)


Supreme Court Turns Away Pennsylvania Electoral Map Dispute

By Andrew Chung, Reuters

30 October 18

 

he U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rebuffed a bid by Republican legislators in Pennsylvania to reinstate a congressional district map struck down by that state’s top court as unlawfully biased in favor of Republicans.

A new state electoral map, devised by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court after it invalidated the Republican-drawn districts in January, is seen as giving Democrats a better shot at gaining seats in the U.S. House of Representatives in the Nov. 6 congressional elections in which President Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans are seeking to retain control of Congress.

The case involves a practice called partisan gerrymandering in which electoral maps are drafted in a manner that helps one party tighten its grip on power by undermining the clout of voters that tend to favor the other party. The high court in June failed to determine whether partisan gerrymandering violates the U.S. Constitution after hearing high-profile cases from Wisconsin and Maryland.

The justices, with no noted dissents, on Monday rejected the Republican appeal of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling throwing out the previous Republican-drawn map because it violated the state constitution’s requirement that elections be “free and equal” by marginalizing Democratic voters.

The high court previously rejected two Republican requests to block the new district boundaries that the state high court issued to replace the old map, which had been in effect since 2011. Republicans have held 13 of the state’s 18 U.S. House seats since 2011 despite Pennsylvania being a closely divided bellwether state.

Jason Torchinsky, a lawyer for the Republican legislators, expressed disappointment with the justices’ decision.

“I remain confident that the court will have to address the scope of the role of the state courts in congressional redistricting sooner rather than later,” Torchinsky said.

A group of 18 Democratic voters sued in Pennsylvania last year to challenge the Republican-drawn maps. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court struck down the 2011 map and later adopted the new map in time for use during the party nominating contests in May.

The state’s Republican legislative leaders urged the justices to intervene and overturn the ruling by the state court, which they accused of usurping the legislature’s authority over redistricting.

State and federal legislative district boundaries are reconfigured after the U.S. government conducts a census every decade. Partisan gerrymandering has been used for two centuries but has become more extreme with the use of computer programs to maximize its effects in a way that critics have said warps democracy.

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
0 # MikeAF48 2018-10-30 17:57
Different subject, MSNBC is out on the road talking and listening to people.
 
 
0 # Citizen Mike 2018-10-31 08:30
Interesting to observe that a court that is expected to be biased in favor of Republicans has decided against a Republican redistricting plan because it was unjust gerrymandering. Perhaps the court will not turn out to be as partisan as expected but will continue to act as proper unbiased jurists driven by the letter of the law and legal precedent.
 
 
+3 # tedcloak 2018-10-31 13:06
Nice try, Mike, but I'll bet the SCOTUS reasoning is simply that the Constitution is very clear that running elections is the province of the several states. Same as when they crippled the Voting Rights Act.