(01-20-2018 11:15 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-19-2018 10:46 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-19-2018 05:56 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-19-2018 05:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-19-2018 05:42 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  See U. S. Constitution.

The lower judge is creating law by ignoring what the Supreme Court has said on the issue and preemptively finding for the ones challenging the districts and giving them 2 weeks to fix them. That's a massive fail and the height of arrogance.

First it isn't one judge it is three. They have written a very detailed ruling on what makes this unconstitutional. I can assure you that Rep. David Lewis (Republican-Harnett) and his cohorts are more than capable of meeting a two week deadline. He / they have been drawing these districts for the last 7 years. The SCOTUS will look at the ruling and determine if they are correct or not and once again it will probably come down to Kennedy. I've seen a couple of experts that after reading the complete ruling say that it appears to be written directly to Kennedy. It will be interesting.

You seriously underestimate the complexity. When the Democrats gerrymandered Texas in 1990, it required the number of voting precincts in Harris County (Houston) to increase from 600 to 1700. It was a real mess. Everybody in the same precinct has to have the same ballot and there are multiple levels of elections. I think there was even one precinct with no registered voters.

Lewis and his gang have all the data, all the programs that they need. They have this down to a science. They don't have to reinvent the wheel, just make a few tweaks to make them constitutional.

But those tweaks impact things all down the line. You are only thinking about the first level.

Another NC gerrymandering decision came down this week as well. The GOP legislative districts were declared as racially gerrymandered and they wanted another shot at designing them after two fails. The 3 judge panel ruled that they had their chances and would use maps drawn by an independent third party.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/judging-the...mail_share
WSJ article primarily talks about the travel ban, but goes to the problem-lawless judges.

"...The courts need to oppose genuine acts of executive excess, but judicial rulings have to be rooted in law, not political animus. Otherwise the judiciary will be guilty of the same lawless impulses that liberals claim to fear in Mr. Trump."

(01-20-2018 11:32 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  Another NC gerrymandering decision came down this week as well. The GOP legislative districts were declared as racially gerrymandered and they wanted another shot at designing them after two fails. The 3 judge panel ruled that they had their chances and would use maps drawn by an independent third party.

So a court decided to strip a power granted to the states because 2 strikes and your out?

Why didn't that happen in the 90s

(01-20-2018 12:50 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-20-2018 11:32 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  Another NC gerrymandering decision came down this week as well. The GOP legislative districts were declared as racially gerrymandered and they wanted another shot at designing them after two fails. The 3 judge panel ruled that they had their chances and would use maps drawn by an independent third party.

So a court decided to strip a power granted to the states because 2 strikes and your out?

Why didn't that happen in the 90s

Yeah, it sure didn't happen in Texas. Dems kept trying and kept getting it thrown out.

(01-20-2018 12:50 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-20-2018 11:32 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  Another NC gerrymandering decision came down this week as well. The GOP legislative districts were declared as racially gerrymandered and they wanted another shot at designing them after two fails. The 3 judge panel ruled that they had their chances and would use maps drawn by an independent third party.

So a court decided to strip a power granted to the states because 2 strikes and your out?

Why didn't that happen in the 90s

Call it stubbornness, arrogance, self-righteousness or just a power grab they refused to let go of, but they knew what it would take to remove the racial gerrymandering that they did the first time. They tried to do it again and the court said no deal.

(01-19-2018 09:49 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-19-2018 06:31 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  This ruling is a win for democracy because the Supreme Court overturned an attempt by the judicial branch to legislate. There may well be a legitimate argument against the case at hand but as witnessed by the SC rebuke the corrective measures enacted by the lower court are not the answer.

This.

Having an out of state professor from California come in is insanity

..and insulting.

(01-20-2018 02:43 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-20-2018 12:50 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-20-2018 11:32 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  Another NC gerrymandering decision came down this week as well. The GOP legislative districts were declared as racially gerrymandered and they wanted another shot at designing them after two fails. The 3 judge panel ruled that they had their chances and would use maps drawn by an independent third party.

So a court decided to strip a power granted to the states because 2 strikes and your out?

Why didn't that happen in the 90s

Call it stubbornness, arrogance, self-righteousness or just a power grab they refused to let go of, but they knew what it would take to remove the racial gerrymandering that they did the first time. They tried to do it again and the court said no deal.

So it's ok for dems to get unlimited do overs but not GOP?

(01-20-2018 04:46 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-20-2018 02:43 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-20-2018 12:50 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-20-2018 11:32 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  Another NC gerrymandering decision came down this week as well. The GOP legislative districts were declared as racially gerrymandered and they wanted another shot at designing them after two fails. The 3 judge panel ruled that they had their chances and would use maps drawn by an independent third party.

So a court decided to strip a power granted to the states because 2 strikes and your out?

Why didn't that happen in the 90s

Call it stubbornness, arrogance, self-righteousness or just a power grab they refused to let go of, but they knew what it would take to remove the racial gerrymandering that they did the first time. They tried to do it again and the court said no deal.

So it's ok for dems to get unlimited do overs but not GOP?

Nope. The Democrats had to correct districts when ruled to do so in the past. The current GOP legislature hasn't been doing that. Thus we have what we see today.

It did not take genius to look at that map and see that a couple of the districts are just out right silly and that no one could represent effectively a district that meandering and disconnected. Pure idiocy.

(01-20-2018 05:36 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  It did not take genius to look at that map and see that a couple of the districts are just out right silly and that no one could represent effectively a district that meandering and disconnected. Pure idiocy.

The 90s maps that were allowed to stand or the current map?

(01-20-2018 05:15 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-20-2018 04:46 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-20-2018 02:43 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-20-2018 12:50 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-20-2018 11:32 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  Another NC gerrymandering decision came down this week as well. The GOP legislative districts were declared as racially gerrymandered and they wanted another shot at designing them after two fails. The 3 judge panel ruled that they had their chances and would use maps drawn by an independent third party.

So a court decided to strip a power granted to the states because 2 strikes and your out?

Why didn't that happen in the 90s

Call it stubbornness, arrogance, self-righteousness or just a power grab they refused to let go of, but they knew what it would take to remove the racial gerrymandering that they did the first time. They tried to do it again and the court said no deal.

So it's ok for dems to get unlimited do overs but not GOP?

Nope. The Democrats had to correct districts when ruled to do so in the past. The current GOP legislature hasn't been doing that. Thus we have what we see today.

They sure didn't correct them in Texas.

(01-20-2018 08:39 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-20-2018 05:36 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  It did not take genius to look at that map and see that a couple of the districts are just out right silly and that no one could represent effectively a district that meandering and disconnected. Pure idiocy.

The 90s maps that were allowed to stand or the current map?

The 90s done by the Dems to try to retain power in both North Carolina and Texas were pretty ridiculous.