world

Justice Department sues Texas over new redistricting maps

14 Comments
By ACACIA CORONADO

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

14 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Something tells me all of these issues are going to both the state supreme courts and federal.

An analysis of state voting laws by Northern Illinois University and Jacksonville University concluded that it is harder to cast a ballot in Texas than in any other state across the country.

On the flipside, Texas is the state with the most restrictive voting processes, followed by Georgia, Missouri, Mississippi and Tennessee.

https://wavemagazineonline.com/new-research-calculates-difficulty-of-voting-in-each-state/

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The map is laughable. It’s an obvious attempt to maintain the power of the declining white population.

Funny how the “don’t legislate from the bench” Roberts court decided that the routine continuation of the voting rights act (which had garnered well over 300 votes in the House) was suddenly unnecessary.

And that’s when the gerrymandering got REALLY BAD, The only real threat of losing an election was from a primary by an extremist, and OUT CAME THE CRAZIES.

Gossar, Greene, Golmert, Gaetz, and Gun Barbie et. al. Few if any of these goobers would have gotten elected (or at least survived re-election) were their districts not drawn by design to guarantee it.

Voters should select their representatives, not the reverse.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The map is laughable. It’s an obvious attempt to maintain the power of the declining white population. 

Nonsense, race has nothing to do with if, ideology on the other hand does.

Funny how the “don’t legislate from the bench” Roberts court decided that the routine continuation of the voting rights act (which had garnered well over 300 votes in the House) was suddenly unnecessary. 

Ok, so liberals respect the court as long as the justices are activists, but when they’re constitutionalists they legislate from the bench…hmmm

And that’s when the gerrymandering got REALLY BAD, The only real threat of losing an election was from a primary by an extremist, and OUT CAME THE CRAZIES.

So the Squad are noble, smart and sane group of women politicians with zero political agenda and upstanding citizens as well as rational roll models for congress.

Gossar, Greene, Golmert, Gaetz, and Gun Barbie et. al. Few if any of these goobers would have gotten elected (or at least survived re-election) were their districts not drawn by design to guarantee it.

Voters should select their representatives, not the reverse.

Oh, stop Democrats gerrymander as much as the Republicans, go to California and New York and you’ll see if in full force. Democrats are always silent on the issue of gerrymandering as long as it benefits them, if it doesn’t they cry foul and racism. Both sides will do it if it helps their cause of part

https://thefederalist.com/2021/09/29/democrats-decry-gerrymandering-while-using-it-to-gain-power/

0 ( +2 / -2 )

You have to give the Republicans credit. Considering they are supported by a minority that is ever shrinking, they are very creative at figuring out ways they can exert the will of the minority over the will of the majority. The founding fathers would be proud.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

You have to give the Republicans credit. Considering they are supported by a minority that is ever shrinking

If that were true then the Dems would be a shoe-in to win not only the House but to pick up majorities in gubernatorial and mayoral races single-handedly and that’s not happening. Texas won’t turn blue, Florida announced last month its officially a red state again. The GOP is far from shrinking. Next year the House and then the Senate and beyond…

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

If that were true

It is true.

then the Dems would be a shoe-in to win not only the House but to pick up majorities in gubernatorial and mayoral races single-handedly

No, that's wrong.

Texas won’t turn blue, Florida announced last month its officially a red state again.

I agree:

You have to give the Republicans credit. Considering they are supported by a minority that is ever shrinking, they are very creative at figuring out ways they can exert the will of the minority over the will of the majority. The founding fathers would be proud.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Ok, so liberals respect the court as long as the justices are activists, but when they’re constitutionalists they legislate from the bench…hmmm

the term is strict constructionist, Bass. There is no such thing as a constitutionalist. It is a lie, made up by the Fox News “expert” crowd and blathered shamelessly by disingenuous politicians like Ted Cruz, who 100% knows it’s a lie.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

And to toss your argument right back at you Bass; seems your side loves the constitution while the other side is, uh, “activists.” Hmm was of the impression constitutional law was supposed to be objective. Not very objective terminology there, Bass. Maybe you could toss an “infidel” in there just to keep things interesting?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Strict constructionist is used to describe applying a literal interpretation of the constitution. A constitutionalist favors limiting involvement of the government, and any power should basically derive from the constitution.

“This is not the first time that Texas has acted to minimize the voting rights of its minority citizens,” 

No one is locking anyone up and preventing them from going to the voting booths.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

despite all this minorities cant vote narrative I have never seen anyone with concrete proof that they attempted to vote and were unlawfully denied. Seems that would be a big and would be on all the TV and internet platforms.

Never seen it, could have been 1 or 2 but not enough to "affect the election" anywhere.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

It is true.

Yeah? Show me a poll where the Dems prospects are good for keeping the House. Take your time.

No, that's wrong.

Ok, so Beto O’Rourke could be the next governor? Evidently getting beat last time around wasn’t good enough for him, let’s go for round two.

>

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Eh? I think they're going to lose.

I heard that from the left in 2010 as well

Eh? Again, you've lost the plot. Do you think vanilla is green?

In other word you know full well, it’s not going to happen. Texas will turn blue when California turns red

the term is strict constructionist, Bass. There is no such thing as a constitutionalist. 

What? According to the left? Because they say so? Lol

And to toss your argument right back at you Bass; seems your side loves the constitution while the other side is, uh, “activists.” Hmm was of the impression constitutional law was supposed to be objective. Not very objective terminology there, Bass.

I think you’re upset because life is just not looking good for the left and I don’t blame the anxiety. That red wave is coming and coming in hard and fast and Dems can’t run away and hide from it fast enough.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

RegBilkToday  01:23 pm JST

Strict constructionist is used to describe applying a literal interpretation of the constitution. A constitutionalist favors limiting involvement of the government, and any power should basically derive from the constitution.

original intent of the framers, not literal interpretation. For the second sentence, yeah, what the dumbed down mass consumption version of strict constructionism peddled by the dude sent by Heritage says.

Republican=Constitution. Not Republican = activist with no respect for constitution.

aka, it’s

 a lie, made up by the Fox News “expert” crowd and blathered shamelessly by disingenuous politicians like Ted Cruz, who 100% knows it’s a lie.

Oh and

No one is locking anyone up and preventing them from going to the voting booths.

that’s a uh…pretty dang low standard

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Oh; and the lawsuit is about redistricting not poll access. If you know the other side could have 100% turnout and only get 35% of the vote, there is no need to keep them from the polls.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites