Welcome to the new normal.With this decision stealing the election is no longer illegal.It will not stop them also doing illegal things as well, because that is who they are.
Right. Roberts acknowledges that gerrymandering is unfair, but what do you expect the courts to do about it? Well how about doing what several appeals courts wanted to do. Appoint a non-partisan map maker to set up districts.
There are methods in place now to separate partisan gerrymandering from random chance, so even the old claim by Justice Potter Stewart about obscenity, that he cannot describe it but he knows it when he sees it, does not apply.
If the courts are not supposed to rule on constitutional issues and miscarriage of justice, what are they supposed to rule on? We have seen the same bullshit from some appeals courts. One example is the courts in Texas claiming it was not their responsibility to assess the validity of claims that the Texas legislature was only protecting a woman's health by putting ambulatory surgical clinic building codes to abortion clinics and requiring admitting privileges on probably the safest medical procedure around. Despite several medical associations saying the claims were bullshit.
If they are not supposed to decide facts and anticipate the consequences of their decisions, like the explosion of voter suppression after Roberts declared racism in America dead, why do we need courts at all. And like that decision, we can expect even more severe gerrymandering after the 2020 census.
Using the basis of this decision, I expect the Supreme Court to ignore the partisan basis of the citizenship question and permit it to be included the n the census. This was just to kick that can a little further down the road and not issue two fanning decisions in one day. Otherwise, it makes the gerrymandering decision even more ridiculous. You either allow partisan influence on everything or on nothing in the political and governmental realm. Roberts is intent on allowing it to be unfettered.
At least CA has an independent redistricting commission already enshrined in law. Not sure how many other states have one, but it could be a wrinkle in the plan for retaliation.
Ideally, the next time the Democrats have both houses of Congress and the presidency, we can pass a law outlawing this shit and be done with it.
They also bought the state Supreme Court. North Carolina is no different in the gerrymandering. Democrats have a 6-1 advantage on our state Supreme Court, but no one has mounted a case against this partisan gerrymandering, despite having 10 of 13 House seats in Republican hands with about a 50/50 total vote split. Like the Congressional House, the state Democrats are not displaying any urgency in correcting the corruption in the GOP.
These are extraordinary times and I'm not seeing Democratic leaders taking this seriously. Chairman Neal in the House Ways and Means committee has been sitting in his butt for two months now after Mnuchin told him to fuck off with his request for Trump's tax records. He says he needs to consult with staff on what to do next. This should take 24 hours, not two months. Take his ass to court, Richard!!
I find a little solace in the fact that I'm (likely) to outlive all of these fuckwads. Trump, McConnell, the partisan hacks on the Supreme Court—all of them. I know there are shitheads in my generation, but it makes me feel a little better knowing that for (hopefully) decades of my life, these fucking relics will be dead and buried.
So in other words, the constitution that was originally written mainly to deal with that whole "taxation without representation" problem, has fallen on its face trying to deal with that very problem?
In addition to being slave owners, the founding fathers were idiots too?
please know that every single person on this message board is here because these things impact us directly, whether its voting rights, body autonomy rights, or immigration.
(it's "IT'S voting rights", in this context)
That’s true. And sometimes there are people who are marginalized in more than one way.
And there’s a hierarchy of oppression in a white male supremacist corporate oligarchy masquerading as a functional democracy, and if you’re willing to even allude to “Oppression Olympics” if not use the phrase verbatim, then you should already know that, AND as a corollary you should also know that it has some people on the bottom, even if you’re not willing to acknowledge it (or even admit it to yourself) … so maybe you don’t need to condescend like you just did.
If you’re white, it makes that level of intentional condescension especially tone deaf. You always had the choice to leave it alone, but you didn’t choose that.
(You also had the choice not to make your initial "response" – it certainly wasn’t required, especially if you’re as sensitive to oppression as you ostensibly claim – but you didn’t make *that* choice either.)
Plus, there are also trust fund progressives. Real ones. They too are more likely to be white (or perhaps you missed the reparations hearings the past few weeks even as there was a MacArthur Grantee giving nationally televised testimony on the Hill).
So even your first … assessment ... wasn’t necessarily entirely accurate.
I won't make it into a contest about who is more marginalized
Except that ... that's exactly what you just tried to do with your comments. So maybe next time a different choice.
and there are still plenty of people out there claiming that if it gets bad enough, then people will magically rise up and everything will get fixed.
Aaaand we're right back where we started with "You sweet summer child".
I wonder why the lawsuit didn't frame partisan gerrymandering as racial discrimination? When the party that protected groups are most likely to support gets systematically gerrymandered by the other party, that definitely reduces their votes in Congress and generally discriminates electorally against those groups. So, racial, not [just] partisan.
Missed your post about the kitty boys (just peeked now that you mentioned it) so would like to offer you all the hugs.
You repeat yourself.
Thanks!
That's a nice portrait, BTW - the lighting is excellent!
Welcome to the new normal.With this decision stealing the election is no longer illegal.It will not stop them also doing illegal things as well, because that is who they are.
Right. Roberts acknowledges that gerrymandering is unfair, but what do you expect the courts to do about it? Well how about doing what several appeals courts wanted to do. Appoint a non-partisan map maker to set up districts.
There are methods in place now to separate partisan gerrymandering from random chance, so even the old claim by Justice Potter Stewart about obscenity, that he cannot describe it but he knows it when he sees it, does not apply.
If the courts are not supposed to rule on constitutional issues and miscarriage of justice, what are they supposed to rule on? We have seen the same bullshit from some appeals courts. One example is the courts in Texas claiming it was not their responsibility to assess the validity of claims that the Texas legislature was only protecting a woman's health by putting ambulatory surgical clinic building codes to abortion clinics and requiring admitting privileges on probably the safest medical procedure around. Despite several medical associations saying the claims were bullshit.
If they are not supposed to decide facts and anticipate the consequences of their decisions, like the explosion of voter suppression after Roberts declared racism in America dead, why do we need courts at all. And like that decision, we can expect even more severe gerrymandering after the 2020 census.
Using the basis of this decision, I expect the Supreme Court to ignore the partisan basis of the citizenship question and permit it to be included the n the census. This was just to kick that can a little further down the road and not issue two fanning decisions in one day. Otherwise, it makes the gerrymandering decision even more ridiculous. You either allow partisan influence on everything or on nothing in the political and governmental realm. Roberts is intent on allowing it to be unfettered.
At least CA has an independent redistricting commission already enshrined in law. Not sure how many other states have one, but it could be a wrinkle in the plan for retaliation.
Ideally, the next time the Democrats have both houses of Congress and the presidency, we can pass a law outlawing this shit and be done with it.
They also bought the state Supreme Court. North Carolina is no different in the gerrymandering. Democrats have a 6-1 advantage on our state Supreme Court, but no one has mounted a case against this partisan gerrymandering, despite having 10 of 13 House seats in Republican hands with about a 50/50 total vote split. Like the Congressional House, the state Democrats are not displaying any urgency in correcting the corruption in the GOP.
These are extraordinary times and I'm not seeing Democratic leaders taking this seriously. Chairman Neal in the House Ways and Means committee has been sitting in his butt for two months now after Mnuchin told him to fuck off with his request for Trump's tax records. He says he needs to consult with staff on what to do next. This should take 24 hours, not two months. Take his ass to court, Richard!!
Well said.
I find a little solace in the fact that I'm (likely) to outlive all of these fuckwads. Trump, McConnell, the partisan hacks on the Supreme Court—all of them. I know there are shitheads in my generation, but it makes me feel a little better knowing that for (hopefully) decades of my life, these fucking relics will be dead and buried.
It's petty, but it's what I've got at this point.
I’m not currently worried about Republicans taking over California.
Greetings, new non-commentor. I hope you are sincere here.
So in other words, the constitution that was originally written mainly to deal with that whole "taxation without representation" problem, has fallen on its face trying to deal with that very problem?
In addition to being slave owners, the founding fathers were idiots too?
God this country is a joke...
I once worked in the Department of Redundancy department.
please know that every single person on this message board is here because these things impact us directly, whether its voting rights, body autonomy rights, or immigration.
(it's "IT'S voting rights", in this context)
That’s true. And sometimes there are people who are marginalized in more than one way.
And there’s a hierarchy of oppression in a white male supremacist corporate oligarchy masquerading as a functional democracy, and if you’re willing to even allude to “Oppression Olympics” if not use the phrase verbatim, then you should already know that, AND as a corollary you should also know that it has some people on the bottom, even if you’re not willing to acknowledge it (or even admit it to yourself) … so maybe you don’t need to condescend like you just did.
If you’re white, it makes that level of intentional condescension especially tone deaf. You always had the choice to leave it alone, but you didn’t choose that.
(You also had the choice not to make your initial "response" – it certainly wasn’t required, especially if you’re as sensitive to oppression as you ostensibly claim – but you didn’t make *that* choice either.)
Plus, there are also trust fund progressives. Real ones. They too are more likely to be white (or perhaps you missed the reparations hearings the past few weeks even as there was a MacArthur Grantee giving nationally televised testimony on the Hill).
So even your first … assessment ... wasn’t necessarily entirely accurate.
I won't make it into a contest about who is more marginalized
Except that ... that's exactly what you just tried to do with your comments. So maybe next time a different choice.
and there are still plenty of people out there claiming that if it gets bad enough, then people will magically rise up and everything will get fixed.
Aaaand we're right back where we started with "You sweet summer child".
*smh*
Thought of some snarky comebacks, but tbh I’m too pissed off for that. Yes. I’m sincere.
I wonder why the lawsuit didn't frame partisan gerrymandering as racial discrimination? When the party that protected groups are most likely to support gets systematically gerrymandered by the other party, that definitely reduces their votes in Congress and generally discriminates electorally against those groups. So, racial, not [just] partisan.