Outcome of the SCOTUS Alabama redistricting case?

[GALeftist]

What do you think will happen regarding the redistricting case Alabama is appealing to the Supreme Court? I feel like they'll make up some hackish reason to go back to 6-1. Thoughts?

[lfromnj]

What do you think will happen regarding the redistricting case Alabama is appealing to the Supreme Court? I feel like they'll make up some hackish reason to go back to 6-1. Thoughts?

There's nothing  politically hackish about either sides views on VRA districts in SCOTUS. (It may be ideological) They have been fairly consistent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._Johnson

[NewYorkExpress]

The Supreme Court gets rid of Section 2 of the VRA entirely with one of the non-Thomas (could be any of them) conservatives joining the liberals for a 5-4 decision.

[I’m not Stu]

You know what my belief is (7 safe R-0D).

[GALeftist]

What do you think will happen regarding the redistricting case Alabama is appealing to the Supreme Court? I feel like they'll make up some hackish reason to go back to 6-1. Thoughts?

There's nothing  politically hackish about either sides views on VRA districts in SCOTUS. (It may be ideological) They have been fairly consistent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._Johnson

I don't really see what coherent argument you could make to justify the position "well, minority districts are required, but they need not be proportional to the racial minority's share of the state's population."

[UncleSam]

What do you think will happen regarding the redistricting case Alabama is appealing to the Supreme Court? I feel like they'll make up some hackish reason to go back to 6-1. Thoughts?

There's nothing  politically hackish about either sides views on VRA districts in SCOTUS. (It may be ideological) They have been fairly consistent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._Johnson

I don't really see what coherent argument you could make to justify the position "well, minority districts are required, but they need not be proportional to the racial minority's share of the state's population."

Because proportionality falls apart when looking at actual voting patterns? For example if Rs were a ‘minority’ in CA it’d be almost impossible to draw proportional seats for them. Proportionality is not a reasonable expectation when the top line numbers are 62-38.

[lfromnj]

What do you think will happen regarding the redistricting case Alabama is appealing to the Supreme Court? I feel like they'll make up some hackish reason to go back to 6-1. Thoughts?

There's nothing  politically hackish about either sides views on VRA districts in SCOTUS. (It may be ideological) They have been fairly consistent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._Johnson

I don't really see what coherent argument you could make to justify the position "well, minority districts are required, but they need not be proportional to the racial minority's share of the state's population."

Because proportionality falls apart when looking at actual voting patterns? For example if Rs were a ‘minority’ in CA it’d be almost impossible to draw proportional seats for them. Proportionality is not a reasonable expectation when the top line numbers are 62-38.

Along with this its really weird that a supreme court getting rid of AA in all likelihood will require 2 black seats in Alabama  because 27% population rule.

[GALeftist]

What do you think will happen regarding the redistricting case Alabama is appealing to the Supreme Court? I feel like they'll make up some hackish reason to go back to 6-1. Thoughts?

There's nothing  politically hackish about either sides views on VRA districts in SCOTUS. (It may be ideological) They have been fairly consistent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._Johnson

I don't really see what coherent argument you could make to justify the position "well, minority districts are required, but they need not be proportional to the racial minority's share of the state's population."

Because proportionality falls apart when looking at actual voting patterns? For example if Rs were a ‘minority’ in CA it’d be almost impossible to draw proportional seats for them. Proportionality is not a reasonable expectation when the top line numbers are 62-38.

It's definitely a reasonable expectation specifically in Alabama specifically regarding race. Like, the reasonable options are one black district or two, and two is proportional. What arguments could there be in favor of one?

[Del Tachi]

What do you think will happen regarding the redistricting case Alabama is appealing to the Supreme Court? I feel like they'll make up some hackish reason to go back to 6-1. Thoughts?

There's nothing  politically hackish about either sides views on VRA districts in SCOTUS. (It may be ideological) They have been fairly consistent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._Johnson

I don't really see what coherent argument you could make to justify the position "well, minority districts are required, but they need not be proportional to the racial minority's share of the state's population."

Because proportionality falls apart when looking at actual voting patterns? For example if Rs were a ‘minority’ in CA it’d be almost impossible to draw proportional seats for them. Proportionality is not a reasonable expectation when the top line numbers are 62-38.

It's definitely a reasonable expectation specifically in Alabama specifically regarding race. Like, the reasonable options are one black district or two, and two is proportional. What arguments could there be in favor of one?

That two VRA seats in Alabama requires a bad map under other "neutral" criteria the legislature may find important: compactness, COIs, etc.  Alabama argues that claims for additional VRA districts need to pass a balancing test that incorporates considerations for other redistricting criteria

And such a balancing test may very well produce an outcome favorable to the legislature, since deciding between 1 or 2 Black districts is perhaps fundamentally different than deciding between 0 or 1 

[I’m not Stu]

I made a map with more focus on COIs and compactness that still has two Democratic districts. Birmingham and Montgomery shouldn't be in the same district.

[GALeftist]

What do you think will happen regarding the redistricting case Alabama is appealing to the Supreme Court? I feel like they'll make up some hackish reason to go back to 6-1. Thoughts?

There's nothing  politically hackish about either sides views on VRA districts in SCOTUS. (It may be ideological) They have been fairly consistent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._Johnson

I don't really see what coherent argument you could make to justify the position "well, minority districts are required, but they need not be proportional to the racial minority's share of the state's population."

Because proportionality falls apart when looking at actual voting patterns? For example if Rs were a ‘minority’ in CA it’d be almost impossible to draw proportional seats for them. Proportionality is not a reasonable expectation when the top line numbers are 62-38.

It's definitely a reasonable expectation specifically in Alabama specifically regarding race. Like, the reasonable options are one black district or two, and two is proportional. What arguments could there be in favor of one?

That two VRA seats in Alabama requires a bad map under other "neutral" criteria the legislature may find important: compactness, COIs, etc.  Alabama argues that claims for additional VRA districts need to pass a balancing test that incorporates considerations for other redistricting criteria

And such a balancing test may very well produce an outcome favorable to the legislature, since deciding between 1 or 2 Black districts is perhaps fundamentally different than deciding between 0 or 1 

Would this apply to other states? Could Illinois then get rid of all its VRA seats save one? I think if that's what they go for it would either need to be hackish or could easily backfire.

[lfromnj]

What do you think will happen regarding the redistricting case Alabama is appealing to the Supreme Court? I feel like they'll make up some hackish reason to go back to 6-1. Thoughts?

There's nothing  politically hackish about either sides views on VRA districts in SCOTUS. (It may be ideological) They have been fairly consistent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._Johnson

I don't really see what coherent argument you could make to justify the position "well, minority districts are required, but they need not be proportional to the racial minority's share of the state's population."

Because proportionality falls apart when looking at actual voting patterns? For example if Rs were a ‘minority’ in CA it’d be almost impossible to draw proportional seats for them. Proportionality is not a reasonable expectation when the top line numbers are 62-38.

It's definitely a reasonable expectation specifically in Alabama specifically regarding race. Like, the reasonable options are one black district or two, and two is proportional. What arguments could there be in favor of one?

That two VRA seats in Alabama requires a bad map under other "neutral" criteria the legislature may find important: compactness, COIs, etc.  Alabama argues that claims for additional VRA districts need to pass a balancing test that incorporates considerations for other redistricting criteria

And such a balancing test may very well produce an outcome favorable to the legislature, since deciding between 1 or 2 Black districts is perhaps fundamentally different than deciding between 0 or 1  

Would this apply to other states? Could Illinois then get rid of all its VRA seats save one? I think if that's what they go for it would either need to be hackish or could easily backfire.

Illinois doesn't just keep its VRA seats because they are VRA seats but because they are part of the Democratic coalitian. Illinois didn't need to draw the 2nd hispanic oppurtunity district but hispanics in the legislature effectively forced it. Look at how Wisconsin Democrats actually barely had majority support for Tony Ever's "fair maps".

For example in a fair map I think a reasonable option regarding diversity in the Chicago metro I think  would obviously keep Robin Kelly's district to take the southside black suburbs  and that tiny strip of Will county with the "spillover". After that Bobby Rush's seat would become something 60% black and take the rest of the Southside black areas of Chicago. The Hispanic district would solely be concentrated on the southern end  of the district while Danny K Davis's district becomes similar to a black seat in LA. It would be evenly hispanic and black right now but blacks would likely control the seat for a while. Lastly if one wishes not for VRA reasons but you can draw a fairly compact Aurora to Joliet seat to make a majority minority seat in the Chicago suburbs/Satellite cities.

[Lief 🗽]

I would be shocked at this point if they don’t scrap VRA districts completely. Roberts especially hates the idea of black people participating in the democratic process, and I doubt any of the other 4 conservatives are to his left on this. I think Democratic lawyers made a huge mistake here.

[Tekken_Guy]

I would be shocked at this point if they don’t scrap VRA districts completely. Roberts especially hates the idea of black people participating in the democratic process, and I doubt any of the other 4 conservatives are to his left on this. I think Democratic lawyers made a huge mistake here.

Then why was the map struck down by conservative courts?

[Del Tachi]

I would be shocked at this point if they don’t scrap VRA districts completely. Roberts especially hates the idea of black people participating in the democratic process, and I doubt any of the other 4 conservatives are to his left on this. I think Democratic lawyers made a huge mistake here.

Then why was the map struck down by conservative courts?

4D chess: conservative jurists are obviously #evil so they struck down the Alabama Legislature's map just so the entire VRA could be killed on appeal to SCOTUS, lmao

[I’m not Stu]

I would be shocked at this point if they don’t scrap VRA districts completely. Roberts especially hates the idea of black people participating in the democratic process, and I doubt any of the other 4 conservatives are to his left on this. I think Democratic lawyers made a huge mistake here.

Then why was the map struck down by conservative courts?

4D chess: conservative jurists are obviously #evil so they struck down the Alabama Legislature's map just so the entire VRA could be killed on appeal to SCOTUS, lmao

Yes. The Trump judges who struck down the map don't want to look like they're defying SCOTUS.

[I’m not Stu]

I’m not the only one who thinks 7-0.

[MATTROSE94]

The Voting Rights Act gets overturned in a 5-4 decision. Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Clarence Thomas author the majority opinion, whereas Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh write concurring opinions.

[I’m not Stu]

Who’s going to be the white Republican who replaces Terri Sewell in AL-07?