News

Supreme Court sides with Texas in redistricting map dispute

in the vicinity


Video

BGH bypasses decision about the partisan redistricting

The judges dismissed separate complaints by Democratic Wisconsin voters and Republicans in Maryland voters, the drawn against the Congress-cards, through their legislative bodies; Doug McKelway reports from Washington.

A sharply divided Supreme court on Monday on your place held, most of the controversial Texas redistricting plan adopted by the GOP-led legislature, despite complaints from civil rights groups are calling for, it was discriminatory.

The case involved claims of racial gerrymandering — that is , voting cards had the effect, damage the voting rights of black and Hispanic voters.

The 5-4 decision held in place, all but one called for the district, the crushing of the conclusions of a special three-judge Federal panel had decided that against the state.

The judicial panel, though, had first of all the voter cards approved on a provisional basis and limits were subsequently adopted by the Parliament. The said justice Samuel Alito, the conservative majority, revealed the presumption of good faith.

SUPREME COURT TO HEAR NORTH CAROLINA’S DISTRICTING DISPUTE

The lower court, said Alito, “to adopt, with only very small changes, the plans, developed by the Texas court.” He added: “All these facts gave the legislature good reason to believe that the court-approved preliminary plans were legally sound.”

Video

Supreme Court could make the decision on the travel ban soon

But the four liberals on the high court, strongly disagreed.

“The court today to allow out of his way, the state of Texas cards, the have been found, a three-judge district court unanimously, adopted for the purpose of the preservation of the racial discrimination charged, his previous maps,” wrote Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

The state court had rejected previously imposed plans, during the civil rights groups had asked to fix the judges, to the extent that partisan gerrymandering can be brought claims before the court.

The lower court, the mandate had arranged two congressional districts and the Capitol are drawing the districts in four counties in the new, in time for the elections in 2018, but the high court blocked last year.

PV-elections held in March, under the existing, out cards required.

The Supreme court found that a state, district, HD90, was an “impermissible racial gerrymander.”

The cases Abbot v. Perez (17-586 and 17-626).

Follow us

Don't be shy, get in touch. We love meeting interesting people and making new friends.

Most popular