House districts with illegal racial gerrymanders

[Greedo punched first]

There are many gerrymandered districts, but are there currently any that violate anti-racial gerrymandering laws?

[Greedo punched first]

I can't imagine Clyburn wanting a gerrymandered district that would disenfranchise black voters. I would think he was pushing for a second VRA (or at least Democratic) district. Are LA-02, AL-07, and SC-06 illegal, or just bad but not quite illegal?

[Greedo punched first]

Do LA-02, SC-06, and AL-07 violate Section 2?

[Greedo punched first]

What would a fair map of Alabama look like?

[Greedo punched first]

I don't think AL-07 or MS-02 is necessarily a problem.  If 2011 VA-03 fell, 2011 LA-02 should obviously fall as well.  Is it possible to draw 2 majority-black CVAP districts in SC without linking distant metros like VA-03 or LA-02?  If so, SC-06 should also fall.

They don’t have to be majority, just have a high enough percentage of African Americans to elect a representative of their choice in both districts.  In S.C., you would have one district anchored in Charleston and another in the connecting Columbia and the PeeDee.  Both districts would have a Democratic performance in the high 50s and a black percentage in the high 40s.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-maps/south-carolina/#Compact

the current SC map wasn't illegal anyway, by the current courts, but a pure fair map would do something like this. (usually 538 compact maps may violate COI's) but here its clear that it makes 3 compact competetive COI's. Arguably it might be worth breaking up the Charleston COI to take Beaufort so the Myrtle beach district takes in Berkeley for 2 coastal districts and then make SC 6th even more black belt based, it would be a competitive black belt seat with it possibly falling in R wave years.

However as I said this violates probably violates the VRA because competitive minority districts are forbidden. Also somehow even if a court did strike down the SC map for a fair map Clyburn would cry for a safe district with Columbia at the very least despite the fact Columbia makes for a very neat almost full congressional district with its suburban county Lexington that is also very competitive.

Competitive minority districts are forbidden, really? Is California's AD-72 an "illegal district" because it's a swing district in the Asian Belt? Are you arguing that Section 2 is unconstitutional?

[Greedo punched first]

I don't think AL-07 or MS-02 is necessarily a problem.  If 2011 VA-03 fell, 2011 LA-02 should obviously fall as well.  Is it possible to draw 2 majority-black CVAP districts in SC without linking distant metros like VA-03 or LA-02?  If so, SC-06 should also fall.

They don’t have to be majority, just have a high enough percentage of African Americans to elect a representative of their choice in both districts.  In S.C., you would have one district anchored in Charleston and another in the connecting Columbia and the PeeDee.  Both districts would have a Democratic performance in the high 50s and a black percentage in the high 40s.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-maps/south-carolina/#Compact

the current SC map wasn't illegal anyway, by the current courts, but a pure fair map would do something like this. (usually 538 compact maps may violate COI's) but here its clear that it makes 3 compact competetive COI's. Arguably it might be worth breaking up the Charleston COI to take Beaufort so the Myrtle beach district takes in Berkeley for 2 coastal districts and then make SC 6th even more black belt based, it would be a competitive black belt seat with it possibly falling in R wave years.

However as I said this violates probably violates the VRA because competitive minority districts are forbidden. Also somehow even if a court did strike down the SC map for a fair map Clyburn would cry for a safe district with Columbia at the very least despite the fact Columbia makes for a very neat almost full congressional district with its suburban county Lexington that is also very competitive.

Competitive minority districts are forbidden, really? Is California's AD-72 an "illegal district" because it's a swing district in the Asian Belt? Are you arguing that Section 2 is unconstitutional?

I do exaggerate but Vietnamese are quite different, See Texas 23 for the best complaints but also the rest of the RGV(they can't be TOOO safe either) which is just a bunch of random bs meant to already inflate an already inflated groups representation.

Does that mean you believe Section 2 is unconstitutional?

[Greedo punched first]

In CA-46, the Hispanic VRA district isn't extended to cover rural whites. Santa Ana is the COI.

[Greedo punched first]

Why wouldn’t the VRA allow competitive majority-minority districts?

[Greedo punched first]

Is SC-06 illegal or just bad?

[Greedo punched first]

There are many gerrymandered districts, but are there currently any that violate anti-racial gerrymandering laws?

I can think of three right now:  LA-02, AL-07, and SC-06.  All three districts needlessly pack African American voters into one district to keep the them from being able to elect a representative of their choice in at least one neighboring district.  All three of these states could easily have a second district where African Americans could elect a representative of their choice.

LA02 IIRC it was all but impossible to draw a 2nd black seat in 2010 due to Katrina,
AL07 sure it makes sense to have one black belt seat based in Montgomery and the black belt and then one Birmingham seat, having 2 black seats with an arm to mobile is just as absurd as the current seat.

This is conflating two separate things. It wasn't possible to draw 2 seats with a black majority in Louisiana, it was perfectly possible to draw 1 seat with a black majority and another where blacks would likely have been able to elect the candidate of their choice.

I'd also point out that AL-07 already gets within about 40 miles of Mobile. Sticking an arm out to grab it isn't absurd unless you think the VRA as a whole is absurd.

Wrong. It is possible.

[Greedo punched first]

I suspect the existing black CD under current law would be illegal if there were a redux of it, since a New Orleans based CD would be minority performing, but I also don't think the VRA requires the creation of a second black CD, since a non gerrymandered map does not result in such a CD. One has to create a CD that chops Baton Rouge, and Alexandria, and snake up the Mississippi River to far away rural areas. On the Louisiana thread I posted a non gerrymandered map that I think is almost certainly legal.

Eric Holder is working on a case involving Louisiana's map. This article proves Louisiana's map is illegal.

[Greedo punched first]

Racial composition map of my fair map of Alabama.

[Greedo punched first]

There is also a case in Alabama. I think the map I drew would work. Because Alabama is more Republican than Louisiana, it's much harder to draw a second performing district in Alabama. I drew what I think is a fair map with a VRA district and a Birmingham district.

Alabama is another case where there is a case for 2 but 1 is also acceptable.

Alabama is more Republican than Louisiana. It's far more difficult to draw two in Alabama. My Alabama map has one performing Black Belt district and one Democratic leaning Birmingham district.

[Greedo punched first]

There is also a case in Alabama. I think the map I drew would work. Because Alabama is more Republican than Louisiana, it's much harder to draw a second performing district in Alabama. I drew what I think is a fair map with a VRA district and a Birmingham district.

Alabama is another case where there is a case for 2 but 1 is also acceptable.

Alabama is more Republican than Louisiana. It's far more difficult to draw two in Alabama. My Alabama map has one performing Black Belt district and one Democratic leaning Birmingham district.

A Birmingham district is a de facto black opportunity CD isn't it? So perhaps 1.5 seats as opposed to 1.

The Birmingham district is majority white by CVAP, but leans Democratic. It has a decent chance of electing a white Democrat.

[Greedo punched first]

There is also a case in Alabama. I think the map I drew would work. Because Alabama is more Republican than Louisiana, it's much harder to draw a second performing district in Alabama. I drew what I think is a fair map with a VRA district and a Birmingham district.

Alabama is another case where there is a case for 2 but 1 is also acceptable.

Alabama is more Republican than Louisiana. It's far more difficult to draw two in Alabama. My Alabama map has one performing Black Belt district and one Democratic leaning Birmingham district.

A Birmingham district is a de facto black opportunity CD isn't it? So perhaps 1.5 seats as opposed to 1.

The Birmingham district is majority white by CVAP, but leans Democratic. It has a decent chance of electing a white Democrat.

Are there notable levels of racial polarization in Dem primaries in Birmingham?

I don't know. It's probably less polarized than most of the state.

[Greedo punched first]

There is also a case in Alabama. I think the map I drew would work. Because Alabama is more Republican than Louisiana, it's much harder to draw a second performing district in Alabama. I drew what I think is a fair map with a VRA district and a Birmingham district.

Alabama is another case where there is a case for 2 but 1 is also acceptable.

Alabama is more Republican than Louisiana. It's far more difficult to draw two in Alabama. My Alabama map has one performing Black Belt district and one Democratic leaning Birmingham district.

If Alabama does not lose a seat, just drawing a seat contained within the county that contains Birmingham (Jefferson) gives the Dems a second black performing CD. That is a case that Holder might well win, if lines are drawn by the Pubs to reduce black voting power. If Alabama does lose a seat, since then you cannot draw two remotely "compact" 50% BCVAP CD's, Holder does not have a case at all, unless SCOTUS tacks on this matter (highly unlikely). Thus the Pubs don't have much skin in the game whether the final census numbers excise a seat from NY (the second one) or Alabama. Either way, the seat lost is most probably theirs. But the Alabama Pubs might, if Alabama does not lose a seat,  want to go to SCOTUS, to test SCOTUS for their most execrable motives in this case, in my opinion.

You mean the ALGOP would try to get seven safe R districts?