ADVERTISEMENT

South Carolina to use congressional map deemed unconstitutional

cigaretteman

HR King
May 29, 2001
77,442
58,937
113
Deplorable:
A federal court ruled Thursday that time had run out to draw a new congressional district in South Carolina and said the state could use its existing map this year even though it had earlier determined that map was unconstitutional.

Cut through the 2024 election noise. Get The Campaign Moment newsletter.

The panel of three judges last year concluded that South Carolina’s Republican-led legislature “exiled” 30,000 Black voters from the district to make it safer for a White GOP incumbent, Rep. Nancy Mace.

South Carolina appealed, and both sides asked the Supreme Court to expedite the case to ensure a final ruling was in place well ahead of election season. The justices heard arguments in October but have yet to rule.
With no decision and the June 11 primary on the horizon, South Carolina sought permission to use the map this year even though it had been deemed unconstitutional. The panel of judges unanimously agreed Thursday to keep the map in place for this election.



It noted that courts typically don’t allow maps to be used once they have been found to be invalid. “But with the primary election procedures rapidly approaching, the appeal before the Supreme Court still pending, and no remedial plan in place, the ideal must bend to the practical,” the judges wrote.
icon-election.png

Follow Election 2024
If the Supreme Court later upholds the lower court ruling, then new maps would have to be drawn for the 2026 election.
Last year the panel, which consists of two judges nominated by President Barack Obama and one by President Biden, found the map illegally split neighborhoods in the Charleston area to make Mace’s race easier. The new lines constituted a racial gerrymander that “exiled over 30,000 African American citizens from their previous district,” the panel found.

In arguments before the Supreme Court in October, attorneys for South Carolina argued that state lawmakers had not relied on race to draw maps in violation of the Constitution. Rather, they used political information to help them decide where to place the lines, they said.


During arguments, a majority of the Supreme Court appeared inclined to reinstate the lines the state had wanted. Five months later, the justices have yet to rule. Both sides had asked the justices to rule by January.
By hanging onto the case, the Supreme Court had effectively allowed the clock to run out for this year’s election.
Candidates must file paperwork to run by Monday and ballots must be sent to military and overseas voters by April 27 under federal law. That timeline led the panel of judges to let the state keep its congressional map for this year.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Ree4
Y'all do understand which court issued this decision, right?
During arguments, a majority of the Supreme Court appeared inclined to reinstate the lines the state had wanted. Five months later, the justices have yet to rule. Both sides had asked the justices to rule by January.
By hanging onto the case, the Supreme Court had effectively allowed the clock to run out for this year’s election.
 
During arguments, a majority of the Supreme Court appeared inclined to reinstate the lines the state had wanted. Five months later, the justices have yet to rule. Both sides had asked the justices to rule by January.
By hanging onto the case, the Supreme Court had effectively allowed the clock to run out for this year’s election.
ok, just want to make sure. that said, my recollection of the arguments was that it was not quite as clear as you make it sound
 
  • Haha
Reactions: globalhawk
During arguments, a majority of the Supreme Court appeared inclined to reinstate the lines the state had wanted. Five months later, the justices have yet to rule. Both sides had asked the justices to rule by January.
By hanging onto the case, the Supreme Court had effectively allowed the clock to run out for this year’s election.
They did this on purpose.
 
Deplorable:
A federal court ruled Thursday that time had run out to draw a new congressional district in South Carolina and said the state could use its existing map this year even though it had earlier determined that map was unconstitutional.

Cut through the 2024 election noise. Get The Campaign Moment newsletter.

The panel of three judges last year concluded that South Carolina’s Republican-led legislature “exiled” 30,000 Black voters from the district to make it safer for a White GOP incumbent, Rep. Nancy Mace.

South Carolina appealed, and both sides asked the Supreme Court to expedite the case to ensure a final ruling was in place well ahead of election season. The justices heard arguments in October but have yet to rule.
With no decision and the June 11 primary on the horizon, South Carolina sought permission to use the map this year even though it had been deemed unconstitutional. The panel of judges unanimously agreed Thursday to keep the map in place for this election.



It noted that courts typically don’t allow maps to be used once they have been found to be invalid. “But with the primary election procedures rapidly approaching, the appeal before the Supreme Court still pending, and no remedial plan in place, the ideal must bend to the practical,” the judges wrote.
icon-election.png

Follow Election 2024
If the Supreme Court later upholds the lower court ruling, then new maps would have to be drawn for the 2026 election.
Last year the panel, which consists of two judges nominated by President Barack Obama and one by President Biden, found the map illegally split neighborhoods in the Charleston area to make Mace’s race easier. The new lines constituted a racial gerrymander that “exiled over 30,000 African American citizens from their previous district,” the panel found.

In arguments before the Supreme Court in October, attorneys for South Carolina argued that state lawmakers had not relied on race to draw maps in violation of the Constitution. Rather, they used political information to help them decide where to place the lines, they said.


During arguments, a majority of the Supreme Court appeared inclined to reinstate the lines the state had wanted. Five months later, the justices have yet to rule. Both sides had asked the justices to rule by January.
By hanging onto the case, the Supreme Court had effectively allowed the clock to run out for this year’s election.
Candidates must file paperwork to run by Monday and ballots must be sent to military and overseas voters by April 27 under federal law. That timeline led the panel of judges to let the state keep its congressional map for this year.
This is their go-to strategy now,. Draw egregious maps that get tossed. Delay-delay-delay. Then "Well, we HAVE to use them because we're too close to the election to change things now!!" Same thing they did in NC.
 
Deplorable:
A federal court ruled Thursday that time had run out to draw a new congressional district in South Carolina and said the state could use its existing map this year even though it had earlier determined that map was unconstitutional.

Cut through the 2024 election noise. Get The Campaign Moment newsletter.

The panel of three judges last year concluded that South Carolina’s Republican-led legislature “exiled” 30,000 Black voters from the district to make it safer for a White GOP incumbent, Rep. Nancy Mace.

South Carolina appealed, and both sides asked the Supreme Court to expedite the case to ensure a final ruling was in place well ahead of election season. The justices heard arguments in October but have yet to rule.
With no decision and the June 11 primary on the horizon, South Carolina sought permission to use the map this year even though it had been deemed unconstitutional. The panel of judges unanimously agreed Thursday to keep the map in place for this election.



It noted that courts typically don’t allow maps to be used once they have been found to be invalid. “But with the primary election procedures rapidly approaching, the appeal before the Supreme Court still pending, and no remedial plan in place, the ideal must bend to the practical,” the judges wrote.
icon-election.png

Follow Election 2024
If the Supreme Court later upholds the lower court ruling, then new maps would have to be drawn for the 2026 election.
Last year the panel, which consists of two judges nominated by President Barack Obama and one by President Biden, found the map illegally split neighborhoods in the Charleston area to make Mace’s race easier. The new lines constituted a racial gerrymander that “exiled over 30,000 African American citizens from their previous district,” the panel found.

In arguments before the Supreme Court in October, attorneys for South Carolina argued that state lawmakers had not relied on race to draw maps in violation of the Constitution. Rather, they used political information to help them decide where to place the lines, they said.


During arguments, a majority of the Supreme Court appeared inclined to reinstate the lines the state had wanted. Five months later, the justices have yet to rule. Both sides had asked the justices to rule by January.
By hanging onto the case, the Supreme Court had effectively allowed the clock to run out for this year’s election.
Candidates must file paperwork to run by Monday and ballots must be sent to military and overseas voters by April 27 under federal law. That timeline led the panel of judges to let the state keep its congressional map for this year.
Has Clarence been out on one of his many Meet the Oligarchs junkets and too busy to review the case?
 
If Republicans moved 30,000 Black voters out of Mace’s 1st District after the 2020 elections and dumped them into Jim Clyburn’s 6th District prior to the 2022 elections then why did Clyburn’s margin of victory decrease?

He won by 47 percentage points in 2014, 43 points in 2016, 42 points in 2018, and 37 points in 2020. But he only won by 24 points in 2022. Do Black voters not like Jim Clyburn?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Tom Paris
Was it bad when the Dems in New York overturned the will of the people and drew their own map to help the Dems? A bipartisan commission approves of the map with a 9-1 vote. Dems decide to just over-rule them and make up their own new Dem friendly map. You guys must all be pissed about this.


Several New York Democrats had signaled their displeasure with the map that was approved 9-1 by the state’s Independent Redistricting Commission earlier this month. The map largely left undisturbed House districts in the New York City suburbs, which have been viewed as potential battlegrounds in November. Those include the 3rd Congressional District on Long Island, which Democrats flipped earlier this month in a special election to succeed disgraced former Rep. George Santos.

The commission’s map would have put at risk freshman Republican Brandon Williams’ central New York seat by adding more territory favorable to Democrats. But, under the compromise crafted by the commission, two Hudson Valley seats – held by Republican Marc Molinaro and Democrat Pat Ryan – each appeared to have grown safer for the incumbents.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/politics/redistricting-states-congressional-maps-house
On the Senate floor Monday afternoon, Democrat Michael Gianaris, the chamber’s deputy majority leader, criticized the commission’s map as slicing through counties in some cases and retaining district lines to protect sitting lawmakers.

“Maps should not be drawn specifically to protect incumbents,” he said.

Democratic state Sen. James Skoufis cited similar arguments in explaining prior to the vote why he opposed the commission’s map.

“I know this has been described as bipartisan, but the way I’ve characterized it is that this is mutually partisan,” he told CNN.

Republicans, meanwhile, accused Democrats of bucking the will of New Yorkers, who supported a 2014 constitutional amendment that helped establish the redistricting panel.

In rejecting the commission’s map, Democratic legislators were saying, “‘We don’t trust the people of New York state,” state Sen. George Borrello said.

New York GOP Chairman Ed Cox called Monday’s vote the “predictable result of a legislature drunk with power that ignores the will of the people.”
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Tom Paris
If Republicans moved 30,000 Black voters out of Mace’s 1st District after the 2020 elections and dumped them into Jim Clyburn’s 6th District prior to the 2022 elections then why did Clyburn’s margin of victory decrease?

He won by 47 percentage points in 2014, 43 points in 2016, 42 points in 2018, and 37 points in 2020. But he only won by 24 points in 2022. Do Black voters not like Jim Clyburn?
Tell me you don’t understand gerrymandering without telling me you don’t understand gerrymandering.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lucas80
Was it bad when the Dems in New York overturned the will of the people and drew their own map to help the Dems? A bipartisan commission approves of the map with a 9-1 vote. Dems decide to just over-rule them and make up their own new Dem friendly map. You guys must all be pissed about this.


Several New York Democrats had signaled their displeasure with the map that was approved 9-1 by the state’s Independent Redistricting Commission earlier this month. The map largely left undisturbed House districts in the New York City suburbs, which have been viewed as potential battlegrounds in November. Those include the 3rd Congressional District on Long Island, which Democrats flipped earlier this month in a special election to succeed disgraced former Rep. George Santos.

The commission’s map would have put at risk freshman Republican Brandon Williams’ central New York seat by adding more territory favorable to Democrats. But, under the compromise crafted by the commission, two Hudson Valley seats – held by Republican Marc Molinaro and Democrat Pat Ryan – each appeared to have grown safer for the incumbents.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/politics/redistricting-states-congressional-maps-house
On the Senate floor Monday afternoon, Democrat Michael Gianaris, the chamber’s deputy majority leader, criticized the commission’s map as slicing through counties in some cases and retaining district lines to protect sitting lawmakers.

“Maps should not be drawn specifically to protect incumbents,” he said.

Democratic state Sen. James Skoufis cited similar arguments in explaining prior to the vote why he opposed the commission’s map.

“I know this has been described as bipartisan, but the way I’ve characterized it is that this is mutually partisan,” he told CNN.

Republicans, meanwhile, accused Democrats of bucking the will of New Yorkers, who supported a 2014 constitutional amendment that helped establish the redistricting panel.

In rejecting the commission’s map, Democratic legislators were saying, “‘We don’t trust the people of New York state,” state Sen. George Borrello said.

New York GOP Chairman Ed Cox called Monday’s vote the “predictable result of a legislature drunk with power that ignores the will of the people.”
I’m shocked you didn’t link a story about Jim Jordan’s district.
 
I’m shocked you didn’t link a story about Jim Jordan’s district.
Link it. Its gerrymandering. It happens and everyone hates when the other side does it. So...is it bad that SC did this but OK that New York did it? What are the rules? What little technicality will you all come up with to make SC the most egregious thing that ever happened and totally different from what NY did which was perfectly acceptable?
 
Link it. Its gerrymandering. It happens and everyone hates when the other side does it. So...is it bad that SC did this but OK that New York did it? What are the rules? What little technicality will you all come up with to make SC the most egregious thing that ever happened and totally different from what NY did which was perfectly acceptable?
I don’t know how many times people tell you - it’s not ok when anyone does this. No one supports democrats doing it. Yet this same tired argument is always made.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom Paris
Link it. Its gerrymandering. It happens and everyone hates when the other side does it. So...is it bad that SC did this but OK that New York did it? What are the rules? What little technicality will you all come up with to make SC the most egregious thing that ever happened and totally different from what NY did which was perfectly acceptable?
You’re talking to someone who was pissed he lost his longtime Republican Congressman when democrats changed Jim Leach’s district and put him out of his home and into Iowa City. So yeah I don’t like it. But again, Republicans have taken it to an entire new level. I mean, they even ran a district boundary down the middle of HBCU North Carolina A&T, so it split the black kids’ vote.

Stop trying to equate the 2 parties. They aren’t equal. It’s only been explained to you guys repeatedly. It’s like you think armed robbery and shoplifting a loaf of bread are the same. If you don’t, the armed robbery is the GOP and the bread thieves are the Democrats. Not. The. Same.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT