The lawyer advancing the scheme faced anywhere from skepticism to outright indignation from the justices. With one notable exception: Justice Neil Gorsuch.
I never thought that I'd witness democracy in this country being on life support, but yet here we are. The question is, will the (conservative) Justices pull the plug?
It appears that the issue here involves only FEDERAL elections--that's the clause that plaintiffs are relying on. Would it have any effect on a state supreme court finding that gerrymandering for districts electing for state offices (here, state reps AND senators) violates the state constitution? Is there anything that says an election has to have on its slate BOTH federal and state offices? Could the state court require separate elections with corrected "fair" districts for state legislators or even dog catchers? It would cost the states more, but who said oppression has to be cost-effective. And pretty soon there might very well be a state legislature composed of folks who LIKE fair districts, order them set up, and decide to merge state and federal elections again, touting the savings to taxpayers.
Yes, in fact, one of the arguments is that this would create two sets of election rules. But, your hypothetical future is a lot of time and money — and no guarantee — that could be avoided by the NC Republican lawmakers losing here.
I never thought that I'd witness democracy in this country being on life support, but yet here we are. The question is, will the (conservative) Justices pull the plug?
It appears that the issue here involves only FEDERAL elections--that's the clause that plaintiffs are relying on. Would it have any effect on a state supreme court finding that gerrymandering for districts electing for state offices (here, state reps AND senators) violates the state constitution? Is there anything that says an election has to have on its slate BOTH federal and state offices? Could the state court require separate elections with corrected "fair" districts for state legislators or even dog catchers? It would cost the states more, but who said oppression has to be cost-effective. And pretty soon there might very well be a state legislature composed of folks who LIKE fair districts, order them set up, and decide to merge state and federal elections again, touting the savings to taxpayers.
Yes, in fact, one of the arguments is that this would create two sets of election rules. But, your hypothetical future is a lot of time and money — and no guarantee — that could be avoided by the NC Republican lawmakers losing here.