Roberts also says that States and Congress can act to combat gerrymandering.
so does that mean congress either passing a law banning partisan gerrymandering or passing a law requiring states to use non-partisan commissions would be allowable under this ruling?
Yes.
Then I think we all know what needs to be done next time Dems have a trifecta.
So Roberts and Company decide that this is a matter left to the legislature in the States. And how are the legislators chosen? By a horribly gerrymandered system in States a b c d and e Etc. So the cure to the disease is warded by the disease itself. Brilliant.
Congratulations Republicans. You can't deal with democracy being on the perennially losing side of public opinion and the future, so you stole denomination of a moderate replacement to ensure your undemocratic cement on power.
2nd. Amendment. Remedies. Looks more necessary everyday I'm sorry to say
The U.S. Constitution specifically leaves Congressional redistricting solely to the State LEGISLATURES, not the Federal courts, absent instructions from Congress (which, outside of the VRA and ban on multi-member districts, don’t exist). That is a political question. The Constitution doesn’t require any specific rule for how states are to be redistricted - nor should any court impose one by fiat.
Your beef is with the state legislatures and Congress - both of which could impose standards if they wish.
Yes, which is why while I wished the ruling had gone the other way, I'm not terribly upset over it: at the very least, the Court in this instance is actually applying judicial restraint rather than imposing right-wing legislation from the bench, as they've done in other cases.
