Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Commonwealth—was a decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on gerrymandering, concerning the power of the Pennsylvania General Assembly to draw maps based on partisan advantage. The Court ruled that the maps adopted by the Republican controlled legislature in 2011 was an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander under the Constitution of ...
Bandemer (1986) that partisan gerrymandering violates the Equal Protection Clause and is a justiciable matter. However, in its decision, the Court could not agree on the appropriate constitutional standard against which legal claims of partisan gerrymandering should be evaluated.
Vieth v. Jubelirer, 541 U.S. 267 (2004), was a United States Supreme Court ruling that was significant in the area of partisan redistricting and political gerrymandering. ...
In response to the increasing efficiency of gerrymandering, activists have developed a weapon to fight back: taking map drawing away from partisan legislatures and giving it to independent citizen ...
There should be fair competition between party candidates and gerrymandering usually gives one party an unfair advantage, writes Rev. Bob Montgomery. Opinion: Gerrymandering promotes extremism in ...
For Democrats to take the House would be like drawing an inside straight from a rigged deck.
Gerrymandering's primary goals are to maximize the effect of supporters' votes and minimize the effect of opponents' votes. A partisan gerrymander's main purpose is to influence not only the districting statute but the entire corpus of legislative decisions enacted in its path. [20] These can be accomplished in a number of ways: [21]
Li says gerrymandering doesn’t only give an outsized advantage to one party, it also eliminates competition. “There are only about 25 seats right now that are toss-ups of the 435 in the US House.