#SCOTUS on Wednesday allowed #California to use a new voter-approved congressional map that is favorable to #Democrats in this year’s #elections, rejecting a last-ditch plea from state #Republicans & the #Trump admin.
The justices had previously allowed #Texas’ Republican-friendly map to be used in 2026, despite a lower court ruling that it likely #discriminates on the basis of #race.
#law
https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-california-congressional-maps-8362a34b739ea91d37a190eee1b6a6d1?utm_source=onesignal&utm_medium=push&utm_campaign=2026-02-04-Breaking+News
@Nonilex Gerrymandering is bad no matter who is doing it but when you are fighting fascists I guess you gotta do what you gotta do
No. Gerrymandering was required by law long before Trump was on the scene, and courts have been addressing it for generations. The laws, and practical realities, would remain long after Trump has wandered off.
Gerrymandering cannot be ended by creating independent election commissions. That just puts those election commissions in charge of the gerrymandering, for better or worse.
But let's not kid ourselves. Gerrymandering is a completely unavoidable factor in our election systems. We need to face that so we can manage it.
Again, Americans have legally required it. Americans actually want it this way. The thing is, Americans want districts gerrymandered because of all sorts of things starting with ideas about historical justice.
But let me be very clear, we have had independent commissions gerrymandering our districts. They have come with their own problems, including corruption and illegal districting.
Again, gerrymandering is unavoidable. Even leaving the gerrymandering to independent commissions doesn't make it not gerrymandering. It just moves the problem around.
So to illustrate, say you have a city that needs to be split into two districts. You give it to an independent commission to do the splitting. How do they split it?
Do they split it along historical neighborhood lines so that two different communities each get their own district? Do they split it with an eye to avoid disenfranchising an ethnic group in each district? Do they split it purely geographically, drawing a straight line through the city?
Just to name three options.
Okay so it's an independent commission. Their choice among those three options is fundamentally political. And that's simplifying it.
You see the issue? Independent commissions do not somehow make it non-political. We have done independent commissions, that's not a mystery to us. It's just that, there's no escaping the political. Yes, it will be political. That's just the reality of government.
But again that doesn't really change the question.
Yeah, you can draw the line eight different ways that still have the same number of people per district, but the question is, which of those eight ways do you draw the line?
And the choice of where to draw the line is necessarily political.
Again my example, do you just draw a straight geographical line with the same number of people on each side, or do you draw a curved line to preserve community interests, again with the same number of people on each side?
The choice between those two lines is political. The choice itself is a political one.
@volkris @Nonilex I think that is americans want a different system they have to be willing to craft it. Other countries have independent electoral commissions and usa can change the constitution if needed to make it happen