“What is not forbidden is permitted”

That is a rather narrow interpretation of the law taken by the supreme court.

I tought they were called upon to rule on what is forbidden or permitted.

Laredo, TX is a perfect example of this idiotic way of interpreting the law.

Re-Distriting in Laredo, TX was made an exception to the rulling because in that case the re-distriting affected minorities. As a result Henry Cuellar (D) lost to Henry Bonilla (R) by a narrow margin that came about by re-distriting Laredo’s population. The court ruled that minorities were affected therefore the re-distriting in Laredo, TX was wrong. But the re-distriting had the exact same effect and it was done with the exact same intentions in Anglo districts and that is OK with the Supremes!!. On top of this the re-distriting was done way before the 10 year census and that is also OK !!

So in short the supremes think that re-distriting is not allowed when it affects minorities, but is allowed when it affects Anglos. And now the 10 year census that is suposed to justify change is no longer needed. What may I ask justifies change now? Delay like ass holes justify change now? Because if that is the case we and our Democracy are in trouble now my friend.

The census taken every ten years gives re-districting boards a clear view as to how to proceed in their task.

What the supre court did was to allow politicians to do wherever they like, when they like. No longer real numbers from census matter. For the life of me I don’t understand how you or any one can support this idiocy.

For you to say that there will not be much disruption is rather naive. Just because re-distriting is difficult does not mean it will not be done. The fact is that this decision by the Supreme Court just made it much less difficult.

The stakes are extremely high for Republicans and Democrats now, and you can bet top dollar that the incentive to “re-district before your foe does, will be overwhelming”. Is like an arms race now.

Hell, no responsible party chairman will propose NOT to redistrict when you have the chance now!! Is now or never for the two parties. Republicans just opened Pandora’s box in Texas, now they, and all Americans will suffer the consecuences.

The Supreme Court just made an incredible mistake. Scalia (You mentioned him) is a joke. The guy has no credibility left after the debacle in Florida. Where was his so called “textualism” then?

What the divided decision by the Supre Court did was to give politicians the go ahead to undermine our democracy at will.

And we are “creting” a Democracy in Iraq!!! What a joke.

If you are a proponent of constitutional orginalism or Scalia like textualism, you have to applaud their observation about the frequency of re-districting. The Constitution requires seats in the US House to be re-apportioned between the states every ten years. It does not perscribe nor does it require states to follow any fixed schedule for drawing the boundaries of federal congressional districts. That is a matter addressed by state constitutions and statutes. State laws also control the re-districting process for state offices.

The Court has correctly opined that “what is not forbidden is permitted.”

Practically, I don’t think you will see this cause as much disruption as some predict. Getting a legislature to draw boundaries is a difficult and lengthy process, and in many cases it also involves the infamous “pre-clearance” of the US Justice Department as well as numerous law suits by interest groups who purport to represent “the people” or some group of otherwise perpetually aggrieved citizens. Politicians as a class (homo sapiens) tend to avoid pain, so while you may see an occasional spectacle. It’s not very likely.

Anyone who is part of gerrymandering is an enemy of democracy. Anyone who fails to object to gerrymandering is an enemy of democracy. The reference to Democratic gerrymandering in the early eighties is typical of American political myopia. For someone like me, from the outside, it just means that the whole system is corrupt, not just one side.

Sometimes American commentators say “It’s always been like that. You can’t get away from it.” Well, other countries have got away from it. The province I come from in Canada, Saskatchewan, had gerrymandering in the first election I was aware of in 1971. The incumbents lost, partly because of the public’s anger about gerrymandering. The new government, rather than gerrymandering on its own account, established independent electoral commissions, and there’s been no trouble since then.

Americans: If you can’t deal with this very simple problem in your system, no one has any reason to regard your system as a model, not in Iraq, not anywhere.

Of course, since it’s done for such noble reasons, not to many on the left seem to care that the practical effect of that gerrymandering is the concentration of people who vote Democratic.

There is no doubt that gerrymandering, as it is practiced today, is harmful to our democracy. But the drawing of district lines has always been done with politics in mind. It’s just that with the polarization we have today, there is less comity about it.

It used to be that incumbents - especially long term incumbents - of either party were drawn pretty safe seats no matter who was in charge in the state capitol. These kinds of gentleman’s agreements were quite common until the court mandated redistrictings that serve two purposes; marginalize minorities by limiting their representation in Congress and increase the number of Democratic seats.

What DeLay did was extreme - as what Burton in 1980. As long as their is partisanship, you will have excesses on both sides.

Right on target. What is there to celebrate as a Republican?

What the supremes have done with their “enlightened” decision is to ensure an endless cycle of retaliation by Republicans and Democrats.

By taking down the legal constraint the the 10 year census produced as a deterrant for all out abuse, the Supreme Court just ensured an endless food fight between parties.

What a way to run a Democracy!!! Now it is legal to use Gerrymandering at any time, in any place, by any one.

The myopic view taken by the Supreme Court in their decision to disregard census numbers as a restraint for Gerrymandering is appaling. As a Republican (or Democrat) there is not a darn thing to celebrate about that STUPID decision. That is unless you don’t mind to be put in different voting districts every time there is a change in the ruling party in power.

Gerrymandering as far as I am concerned is a cheap, low life way of unfairly taking advantage of our Democracy. The same Democracy that so many people have fought and die to defend. It was invented by Politicians for the benefit of Politicians NOT THE PEOPLE.

And it doesn’t matter that the Democrats have and would do the same… we’re supposed to be better than they are. what a terrific tagline for the GOP: The Republican Party… no more corrupt and self-serving than the Democrats!