tbh, I assumed that from the start. Particularly in a state where Republicans just lost control over redistricting, creating a commission where they could deadlock the process and having maps be drawn by a court whose members they appointed seemed like a textbook case of gaming the system. Even in a situation without the VASC, they probably would never reach an agreement anyway. There's just way too many conflicts of interest and self-interest at play.
I honestly think independent commissions and the way they operate/are stacked are one of the most egregious examples of bad-faith and ill-intentioned "gerrymandering reform," and they’re the main reason why I prefer even the current system to this kind of reform. I don’t know if that’s what happened here, but it always baffles me when so-called "independent" commissions act in a more partisan manner than even state legislatures/governors (we see this in states like MT/NJ/etc. as well). It’s a shame because it’s in both parties' interest to genuinely tackle gerrymandering at this point (it’s also the right thing to do from a moral standpoint, obviously, but electoral calculations will always take precedence over moral arguments in most politicians' minds) rather than just creating another (this time ostensibly 'non-partisan') thinly veiled gerrymander.
I’m completely opposed to those commissions in any state.
