Kroll writes: "The Supreme Court�s five conservatives ruled Thursday that federal courts have no role to play in striking down politically rigged congressional maps that deny equal representations to citizens of a given state."
Associate Justice Elena Kagan poses in the official group photo at the US Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. (photo: Mandel Ngan/Getty)
'Tragically Wrong': 6 Brutal Lines from Justice Kagan's Gerrymandering Dissent
27 June 19
The liberal justice blasted the Supreme Court�s conservatives for abdicating their duty and putting American democracy in danger
he Supreme Court�s five conservatives ruled Thursday that federal courts have no role to play in striking down politically rigged congressional maps that deny equal representations to citizens of a given state. The court�s majority opinion, responding to two lawsuits challenging gerrymandered maps in Maryland and North Carolina, effectively punted, saying there is no standard to decide such cases. The decision is a serious blow to voting rights groups who had hoped the high court would step in and set a precedent on the issue of gerrymandering.
In her dissent, Justice Elena Kagan, one of the court�s four liberals, blasted the five conservative justices. She accused them of abdicating their duties with a �tragically wrong� decision that would have disastrous consequences for American democracy. Here are six of the most blistering lines from Kagan�s dissent:
- �The majority�s abdication comes just when courts across the country, including those below, have coalesced around manageable judicial standards to resolve partisan gerrymandering claims.�
- �Maybe the majority errs in these cases because it pays so little attention to the constitutional harms at their core. After dutifully reciting each case�s facts, the majority leaves them forever behind, instead immersing itself in everything that could conceivably go amiss if courts became involved.�
- �The majority�s idea instead seems to be that if we have lived with partisan gerrymanders so long, we will survive. That complacency has no cause. Yes, partisan gerrymandering goes back to the Republic�s earliest days. (As does vociferous opposition to it.) But big data and modern technology�of just the kind that the mapmakers in North Carolina and Maryland used�make today�s gerrymandering altogether different from the crude line-drawing of the past.�
- �For the first time in this Nation�s history, the majority declares that it can do nothing about an acknowledged constitutional violation because it has searched high and low and cannot find a workable legal standard to apply.�
- �[I]n throwing up its hands, the majority misses something under its nose: What it says can�t be done has been done. Over the past several years, federal courts across the country�including, but not exclusively, in the decisions below�have largely converged on a standard for adjudicating partisan gerrymandering claims (striking down both Democratic and Republican districting plans in the process).�
- �Of all times to abandon the Court�s duty to declare the law, this was not the one. The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government. Part of the Court�s role in that system is to defend its foundations. None is more important than free and fair elections. With respect but deep sadness, I dissent.�
You can read the majority�s opinion and Kagan�s dissent here.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
Obviously these euphemistically titled death-inducemen t programs are performing exactly as our overlords intend, exterminating "surplus" workers -- i.e., those of us no longer exploitable for profit -- without the embarrassment of death camps.
Want absolute, incontrovertibl e proof?
Note how these studies -- which are the austerity programs' equivalents of Zyklon B efficiency reports -- generate no, say again NO, ameliorative efforts whatsoever.
Nor will there ever be such amelioration. The data merely assures the One Percenters that austerity is indeed killing us, that their workforce-liqui dation schemes are succeeding.
Were it otherwise -- were there any hope of amelioration -- the data here revealed would never be allowed into public knowledge.
Wake up, people. Recognize the only thing "exceptional" about today's version of "American exceptionalism" is its exceptional malevolence.
Just look at civilized nations if you don't believe me.
In fact our only access to such a diet is growing it ourselves, which requires horticultural knowledge, physical strength and access to land suitable for subsistence agriculture. But if we have no such access, or if we're low income and physically disabled, or low-income, old and physically disabled (as I am), that option is forever denied us.
(This is one of the innumerable bitter, ultimately deadly truths of genuinely hopeless poverty -- truths which those who have never experienced such poverty remain unaware.)