Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Thursday May 25 2017, @07:25AM   Printer-friendly
from the careful-plotting dept.

The Washington Post reports Supreme Court rules race improperly dominated N.C. redistricting efforts

The Supreme Court ruled [May 22] that North Carolina's Republican-controlled legislature relied on racial gerrymandering when drawing the state's congressional districts, a decision that could make it easier to challenge other state redistricting plans.

The decision continued a trend at the court, where justices have found that racial considerations improperly tainted redistricting decisions by GOP-led legislatures in Virginia, Alabama, and North Carolina. Some cases involved congressional districts, others legislative districts.

[...] [The justices] were unanimous in rejecting one of the districts and split 5 to 3 on the other.

AlterNet reports

Republican legislators used surgical precision to pack black voters into just two districts, the tentacular 1st and the snake-like 12th. The lower court found that these districts targeted voters on the basis of race in violation of the constitution, a move that effectively prevented black voters from electing their preferred candidates in neighboring seats. map

[...] This now-invalidated congressional map was one of, if not the very most, aggressive partisan gerrymanders in modern history. North Carolina is a relatively evenly divided swing state--Donald Trump won it by just 3 points last year--yet these lines offered Republicans 10 safe districts while creating three lopsidedly Democratic seats. Amazingly, all 10 Republican districts hit a perfect sweet spot with GOP support between 55 and 60 percent, a level that is high enough to be secure yet spreads around Republican voters just carefully enough to ensure the maximum number of GOP seats possible.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Friday May 26 2017, @03:02AM

    Going by area is easy. Even better, just hold a contest and let the winner be the map with it's longest perimeter being smaller than that of any other proposed map. (What is your worst-case huge district? Is yours less awful than what your competition has? If so, your map wins and you get famous.)

    Going by population is hard. We can't reliably count people. We don't even know who is in the country.

    That would be a great idea, if it weren't so moronic, given the long-held ideal of "one man, one vote" and not "one hectare, one vote." And then there's that pesky thing we call "the law" [cornell.edu] which requires 435 congressional districts split by *population* and not area. So....not so much.

    Squares are not appropriate. The ideal map is mostly hexagon-like shapes. (on a curved Earth surface so not really hexagons) You vote based on the location of the center of your property.

    Sure. hexagons would fill areas much more efficiently. My point was not to glorify any particular polygon, but point out that current congressional districts often look more like knotted up pasta than polygons. This is inappropriate in my view.

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2