Supreme Court punts on partisan gerrymandering

[Gass3268]

Finds the plaintiffs did not have standing:

https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1008715274193965057

https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/1008715704751808512

They say nothing on the merits of the case.

[Gass3268]

They leave the door open for a 1st amendment based argument in the future:

https://twitter.com/ElectProject/status/1008716236795105281

I believe that's what the argument in the Maryland case is.

[KingSweden]

With 0 dissents. Guess nobody was convinced by “efficiency gap.” I’ve always thought the 1st Amendment claim in Benisek was stronger, so we’ll see

[Gass3268]

With 0 dissents. Guess nobody was convinced by “efficiency gap.” I’ve always thought the 1st Amendment claim in Benisek was stronger, so we’ll see

I think there is a majority here to strike down really egregious partisan gerrymandering, someone just needs to find the right argument.

[BudgieForce]

With 0 dissents. Guess nobody was convinced by “efficiency gap.” I’ve always thought the 1st Amendment claim in Benisek was stronger, so we’ll see

Usually when SCOTUS is 9-0, it makes me reconsider my outrage.

[KingSweden]

With 0 dissents. Guess nobody was convinced by “efficiency gap.” I’ve always thought the 1st Amendment claim in Benisek was stronger, so we’ll see

I think there is a majority here to strike down really egregious partisan gerrymandering, someone just needs to find the right argument.

Agreed.

[Gass3268]

They ruled on the Maryland case too:

https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1008717468704133120

[BudgieForce]

They ruled on the Maryland case too:

https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1008717468704133120

What does it mean? I know we got a couple of lawyers around here.

[Gass3268]

They ruled on the Maryland case too:

https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1008717468704133120

What does it mean? I know we got a couple of lawyers around here.

Looks like that trail will move forward:

https://twitter.com/ElectProject/status/1008718658942783490

[Gass3268]

https://twitter.com/dale_e_ho/status/1008718032930267138

https://twitter.com/lissawicks/status/1008719490815799296

[Gass3268]

I can personally come up with many injuries in the Wisconsin Assembly map, lol!

[Gass3268]

Also interesting:

https://twitter.com/marceelias/status/1008720179545731072

[Antonio the Sixth]

This is quite possibly the dumbest decision they could have made. The First Amendment case is ridiculous, and the idea that individual districts, rather than a map as a whole, are the problem is patently absurd. Gerrymandering is obviously an Equal Protection violation and maps should obviously be assessed holistically.

F**k this decision and f**k Kennedy.

[ON Progressive]

PredictIt (and myself) vindicated.

You said they upheld partisan gerrymandering, which they did not. So no, you're not vindicated for posting clickbait garbage based on PredictIt, of all sites.

[Hindsight was 2020]

PredictIt (and myself) vindicated.

You said they upheld partisan gerrymandering, which they did not. So no, you're not vindicated for posting clickbait garbage based on PredictIt, of all sites.

[Gass3268]

PredictIt (and myself) vindicated.

You said they upheld partisan gerrymandering, which they did not. So no, you're not vindicated for posting clickbait garbage based on PredictIt, of all sites.

Exactly

[krazen1211]

Gerrymandering wins! Victory.

[junior chįmp]

https://www.twitter.com/theglipper/status/1008717475826094080

[BudgieForce]

https://www.twitter.com/theglipper/status/1008717475826094080

Nobody has announced any retirement plans though..

[BudgieForce]

PredictIt (and myself) vindicated.

Your werent vindicated, but you should still lose your moderator status after that garbage.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

With 0 dissents. Guess nobody was convinced by “efficiency gap.” I’ve always thought the 1st Amendment claim in Benisek was stronger, so we’ll see

Usually when SCOTUS is 9-0, it makes me reconsider my outrage.

[Sestak]

Guys, the efficiency gap was a weak metric. This is about the best we could have gotten from Whitford.

Little bit disappointed about Benisek, but the door is still wide open.

[Nyvin]

Not really all that surprised by this.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Guys, the efficiency gap was a weak metric. This is about the best we could have gotten from Whitford.

Little bit disappointed about Benisek, but the door is still wide open.

I don't give a sh*t about the efficiency gap. The WI legislative map is an obvious "I know it when I see it" case. Not everything needs to be based on some arbitrary numerical standard.

[Gass3268]

Guys, the efficiency gap was a weak metric. This is about the best we could have gotten from Whitford.

Little bit disappointed about Benisek, but the door is still wide open.

I don't give a sh*t about the efficiency gap. The WI legislative map is an obvious "I know it when I see it" case. Not everything needs to be based on some arbitrary numerical standard.

They didn't say anything that they could not challenge multiple districts at once, like is currently the practice for racial gerrymandering, just that they can challenge the map in full. This is party of my conclusion of why I think they are going to narrowly strike down gerrymandered maps in the future in situations like Utah where Salt Lake County is ripped to pieces or in the future hypothetical of Davidson County getting torn apart in Tennessee.