Federal judges redraw TX voting districts

[Heartland Patriot]

And now the game's afoot. Abbott has filed an emergency stay with the supreme court.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11 ... cting-map/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The fundamental issue here is: Is the federal government entitled to redraw district lines in a right that is granted to the state? The federal government claims that they had the right to step in because the districts were racially unbalanced, but the law states that the federal government may only approve or disapprove district mapping (preclearance). The issue at hand is whether ANY federal appointee is allowed to _remove_ the right of a state to determine voting districts.

Regardless of "historical preponderance" and exigency, the actions of the San Antonio-based Federal court represent (IMHO) an extreme overstepping of bounds.

So, the short of it is that the Feds can say that one of the listed states didn't draw the lines "correctly" but the Feds cannot draw the lines themselves? If so, then that San Antonio court is full of it...sounds bureaucratic enough...but I still smell a feed lot in all of this mess...

[n5wd]

I don't think they could alter the number of our representatives. That should be set by the census.

You're 100% correct, and because of the 2010 census (you DO remember that one, right?) Texas picked up the four additional representatives which the Texas leg made provisions for in 2011. The web site "Main Law" (http://tinyurl.com/74akyu8)tells the rest better than I could:

In a victory for the Justice Department, a federal court Tuesday rejected congressional and legislative district maps redrawn by Texas for the 2012 election. A three-judge panel in Washington D.C. ruled that the state "used an improper standard or methodology to determine which district afford the minority voters the ability to elect their preferred candidates of choice." according to Bloomberg (News Service).

Under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Texas and a number of other states must allow the panel, made up of two district judges and a circuit judge, to give "pre-clearance" or approve of changes to "any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting.

The ruling means that the state's bid to have the districts approved without a trial were rejected and that a federal court in San Antonio must now draw up provisional voting districts for the 2012 election.

And that's how we got to where we are, today.

[OldCannon]

... The web site "Main Law" (http://tinyurl.com/74akyu8)tells the rest better than I could:

In a victory for the Justice Department, a federal court Tuesday rejected congressional and legislative district maps redrawn by Texas for the 2012 election. A three-judge panel in Washington D.C. ruled that the state "used an improper standard or methodology to determine which district afford the minority voters the ability to elect their preferred candidates of choice." according to Bloomberg (News Service).

Under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Texas and a number of other states must allow the panel, made up of two district judges and a circuit judge, to give "pre-clearance" or approve of changes to "any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting.

The ruling means that the state's bid to have the districts approved without a trial were rejected and that a federal court in San Antonio must now draw up provisional voting districts for the 2012 election.

And that's how we got to where we are, today.

So the Balkanization of Texas has now begun? How convenient.

[bayouhazard]

The foundng fathers showed up the way back, if we have the will.

[n5wd]

So the Balkanization of Texas has now begun? How convenient.

Unless you and your like are thinking about breaking off and forming a new country, then your comment about the "Balkanization" of Texas isn't anywhere near what's happening. But, it sure sounded good, didn't it?

[OldCannon]

So the Balkanization of Texas has now begun? How convenient.

Unless you and your like are thinking about breaking off and forming a new country, then your comment about the "Balkanization" of Texas isn't anywhere near what's happening. But, it sure sounded good, didn't it?

ok, "Federalization". That's accurate.

Not sure what you meant by "you and your like", but I'll assume you mean, "well reasoned people that value states rights over federal rights." I'm comfortable in that skin.

[atticus]

When courts ignore the political process involved in redistricting, and impose their own will instead of respecting the voice of the voters, and separate people based on race and ethnicity, then yes, you are promoting balkanization. Comments referring to "you and your like" are evidence of the balkanization. I don't think forming a new country is needed; we just need for courts to respect the will of the people expressed through their elected representatives. As the Washington D.C. folks like to say repeatedly: "Elections have consequences." I think it's always someone's turn to be mad about election results. I'd prefer to see the losers work the political process more, and run crying to the courts less. Tends to cause fewer problems. Just sayin.'

[The Annoyed Man]

I saw on TV this afternoon that Texas Attorney General Gregg Abbot has filed suit with SCOTUS asking them to stay the redistricting.....

http://txredistricting.org/post/1336970 ... -on-monday

[atticus]

Good on Greg Abbott.

[OldCannon]

Good on Greg Abbott.

To be clear about my position: I understand that the federal courts are entitled to say, "It does not appease us, go back and fix it." I get that. What bothers me is when the federal court says, "0.1% of what you have done is wrong, therefore we will draw completely new lines and bypass the system that you have in place with your duly-elected representatives."

[atticus]

You nailed it. The legislature has a constitutional role to play in drawing up district lines. The federal courts are not legislatures subject to political review by the voters. When they do what they are trying to do in Austin, they usurp power on a most basic and vital part of our republic, i.e. the right to vote. Shame on them. Go Abbott. The usurpation by federal judges is not restricted to Texas; I hear that in San Diego California they are requiring local officials to provide Chinese language services for voters. I didn't say Spanish, or Vietnamese. It's CHINESE. Really? We have that many Chinese speaking citizens in San Diego in 2011 who cannot manage English? Hmmmm . . .

[n5wd]

So the Balkanization of Texas has now begun? How convenient.

Unless you and your like are thinking about breaking off and forming a new country, then your comment about the "Balkanization" of Texas isn't anywhere near what's happening. But, it sure sounded good, didn't it?

ok, "Federalization". That's accurate.

Not sure what you meant by "you and your like", but I'll assume you mean, "well reasoned people that value states rights over federal rights." I'm comfortable in that skin.

No, in this case I meant you and those with similar ethnicity/religion/etc. That's what's breaking up the Balkans, division by religious beliefs, ethnicity, etc.

[texasmusic]

So the Balkanization of Texas has now begun? How convenient.

Unless you and your like are thinking about breaking off and forming a new country, then your comment about the "Balkanization" of Texas isn't anywhere near what's happening. But, it sure sounded good, didn't it?

ok, "Federalization". That's accurate.

Not sure what you meant by "you and your like", but I'll assume you mean, "well reasoned people that value states rights over federal rights." I'm comfortable in that skin.

No, in this case I meant you and those with similar ethnicity/religion/etc. That's what's breaking up the Balkans, division by religious beliefs, ethnicity, etc.

What?

[Bullwhip]

145 years, still carpetbaggin.

[atticus]

+1 on what Bullwhip said.