Supreme Court punts on partisan gerrymandering

[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

[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.

[KingSweden]

I have this suspicion that it is deemed such a tar-baby issue by some on SCOTUS, that they prefer to stall in hopes that the public square mitigates the issue to the point where SCOTUS feels more comfortable to just do nothing. This standing stuff is a moving target for SCOTUS, which it uses to give itself flexibility in what it wants to avoid deciding for the moment.

Do nothing by letting redistricting commissions pass or come into effect in most states to make the issue moot?