The aggressive gerrymander could help Democrats flip as many as five House seats next year. While that could neutralize new maps in Texas, Republicans are redrawing more district lines elsewhere.
The aggressive gerrymander could help Democrats flip as many as five House seats next year. While that could neutralize new maps in Texas, Republicans are redrawing more district lines elsewhere.
The supreme court doesn’t have jurisdiction for state elections so how would they invalidate it?
Term Limits, Inc v Thornton and Bates v Jones are both cases where the federal courts ruled on similar issues (California ballot propositions). I’m not a legal scholar, but if federal courts can determine jurisdiction in those cases, why wouldn’t they in this one?
Never mind the “who’s gonna stop them” issue.
Civil rights law covers district maps. If they want to invalidate it, they can pretend it discriminates against whites.
Edit: Republicans are now claiming exactly that in court