Appeals Court Says Texas' Redistricting Maps Are Discriminatory; Texas Vows to Appeal

Categories: Legal Battles

Thumbnail image for GregAbbottDaughterGun.jpg
The federal government can be more elusive prey than the blackbuck.
When the Texas legislature passed new redistricting maps in 2011, it sure seemed that the lines had been drawn to dilute the power of Democratic-leaning Hispanic voters in favor of Republicans. State leaders swore that wasn't the case, but, rather than taking them to an unfriendly Justice Department for a review mandated by the Voting Rights Act, Attorney General Greg Abbott opted for a much more familiar option: he sued the federal government.

Michael Li had a good breakdown a while back of what was at issue and at stake. Texas was essentially trying to show in court both that the new maps were not drawn with a discriminatory intent and that they don't have a discriminatory effect by diluting the voting strength of minorities.

Today, the three-judge panel of George W. Bush appointees Rosemary Collyer and Thomas Griffith and Obama appointee Beryl Howell determined in a sprawling, 154-page opinion that the maps are indeed discriminatory.

Li is parsing out the specifics -- Texas failed to show an absence of discriminatory intent in redrawing state Sen. Wendy Davis' Fort Worth district -- but writes that it appears to be a "sweeping victory" for the feds.

Abbott took the news with characteristic humility:

He expounded upon the tweet in a written statement.

Today's decision extends the Voting Rights Act beyond the limits intended by Congress and beyond the boundaries imposed by the Constitution. The Attorney General's Office will continue defending the maps enacted by the Texas Legislature and will immediately take steps to appeal this flawed decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Washington DC court's decision applies to the maps originally enacted by the Texas Legislature--so the November elections will proceed as planned under the interim maps drawn by the federal court in San Antonio.

So it's over, except not.

My Voice Nation Help
16 comments
CelebrateDivershitty
CelebrateDivershitty

Naive white-guilt libtard "progressives" like Eric Nicholson can't wait to transform Texas into newer Mexico.  Eric can't wait to live in a place that has even more of a Mexican majority, just to assuage his wimpy white guilt.  Hey Eric if you get the future you want, you are going to be dodging a lot more paintballs and probably worse, you naive dipshit.

Myrna.Minkoff-Katz
Myrna.Minkoff-Katz topcommenter

Republicans are a desperate lot these days.  Because they appeal to a monochromatic base that is shrinking they have no choice other than to tamper with voting rights.  Clearly, this is a last ditch maneuver to save a dying republican party.

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

<i>diluting the voting strength of minorities.</i>

 

Right, because one man - one vote ain't got shit on "some men are more equal than others."

ScottsMerkin
ScottsMerkin topcommenter

OMG its the white guilt lib-tards fault blah blah eric you suck you white guilt observerer.  Cant believe this rag is full white guilt libtard writers 

GuitarPlayer
GuitarPlayer

The phrase, "lib-tard" will show up 5 times before 5pm.

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

 @Myrna.Minkoff-Katz My monochromatic, you mean, Americans?

 

You're going to be really shocked in November when all the whistling-past-the-graveyard in the media is put to the test.

observist
observist topcommenter

 @everlastingphelps Do you deny that a 51% majority could theoretically gerrymander districts so that 100% of elected officials are of that majority?   Would that somehow better represent the idea of "one man one vote"?

oakclifftownie
oakclifftownie

 @GuitarPlayer That was once :)

BTW have you found any Clubs , Pubs or Taverns that have Celebrate Divirshitty Drink specials ?

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

 @observist If you're trying to find someone to defend gerrymandering, I'm not your guy.  My choice would be districts with the shortest perimeters, and people can live where they want to live. 

 

This idea of "gerrymandering is usually bad, but if we let our enlightened philosopher kings-- I mean, judges decide how to do it, it's better for everyone" is crazy. 

ScottsMerkin
ScottsMerkin topcommenter

 @icowrich sarcasm sir, just making fun of a few extremists here. move along

observist
observist topcommenter

 @everlastingphelps If we accept that congressional districts are based on population, then we can't just draw lines on the map and let people move in or out - the boundaries have to be redrawn over time.  Given that, how would you set the boundaries?   Do you think it's better to let one political party or the other set them?

ScottsMerkin
ScottsMerkin topcommenter

 @SlamminSammySnead well if you arent here everyday, you wouldn't get it.  The regulars knew what was going on...toodles

Now Trending

Dallas Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...