For more than 30 years, North Carolinians have pleaded with state and federal courts to provide them with something simple: fair maps that give voters the voice they deserve in elections.
He said it "seems totally ridiculous that our government, and indeed Country, can not ask a basic question of Citizenship in a very expensive, detailed and important Census, in this case for 2020". "The Supreme Court abdicated its duty to preserve free and fair elections with its negligent decision to not strike down partisan gerrymandering but instead asking states to draw maps without judicial review", said Rev. Al Sharpton of the National Action Network, in a statement.
The Trump Administration will continue to pursue the issue. The other was drawn by Democrats in Maryland.
Democratic Gov. Tony Evers included provisions in the state budget calling for creating a nonpartisan redistricting process, but Republicans who control the Legislature's finance committee stripped the proposal out of the spending plan this spring. They say the intention was to intimidate minority households from responding in order to reduce Democratic Party representation.
Although the chief justice often seeks broader coalitions for relatively narrow decisions, John Roberts ended up writing a sweeping redistricting opinion that drew an impassioned dissent from the liberal justices.
Levitt emphasized that the issue isn't a partisan one.
"Make no mistake: the partisan gerrymandering SCOTUS just allowed is also racial gerrymandering-a modern-day Jim Crow".
Roberts reasoned that the question before the court- "determining when political gerrymandering has gone too far"-cannot be grounded in a "limited and precise rationale" because the issue "lacks judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving". Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito Jr., Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented. The plaintiffs in that case have argued that the GOP-drawn lines in the Tar Heel State violate provisions in the state constitution.
The decennial count of the nation's population is one of the federal government's most fundamental responsibilities.
In North Carolina, litigation challenging partisan gerrymandering in state court already is teed up for trial in mid-July.
The Supreme Court "has left open the possibility that a new rationale could get support from five justices", wrote Jennifer Nou, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School, in an email.
In another landmark 5-4 vote, the court blocked the Trump Administration's attempt to add a citizenship question to the upcoming 2020 census, at least for now.
"Even the specter of the citizenship question has intensified this climate of fear", said Vanita Gupta, former head of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division and now president of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, on a conference call with reporters.
"Accepting contrived reasons would defeat the objective of the enterprise", Robert wrote. The court's four other conservatives would have let the question stay on the census as is.
Since a citizenship question would undoubtedly intimidate immigrants, including both United States citizens and especially the undocumented and those in households that include the undocumented, a drastic undercount of the population is guaranteed.
Warren took time from a visit to a Florida migrant detention camp to post a Twitter thread calling the ruling a "welcome relief" but noting that it may still be possible for the Trump administration to add the question. Otherwise, Thomas went on, their reasons were acceptable. Data from the 2020 census is used to allocate congressional seats and distributing billions of federal dollars to states and municipalities in the next decade. New York, and explored exactly what led to Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross deciding to include the question in the first place.
"Who knows if it will ever come back", the analyst added.
In Minnesota, thankfully, officials made clear immediately that they are gearing up for a full and accurate census count no matter what.
The newly discovered Hofeller hard drive, however, contains amended Senate and House maps that were almost complete more than a year before the 2018 elections, according to documents filed by the plaintiffs suing to overturn the maps.