Discussion How long before a Federal judge strikes down the just signed Florida congressional map?

Grey_Beard

Golden Member
Sep 23, 2014
1,825
2,006
136
I can see lawsuits immediately given that the voter laws got so much rebuke. 2022 Napoleon did not like the legislature’s map, so he redrew it making Orlando, a heavy Democrat area, into three districts that will be red or purple at best.


“The Florida House gave final passage to a new congressional map blessed by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) that favors Republicans in as many as four U.S. House seats and erases a seat held by a Black Democrat following a dramatic, last-minute sit-in by state Democrats, many of them Black.

The map, which passed the state Senate on Wednesday, was drawn by DeSantis’s staff after the governor refused to accept any version that didn’t eliminate the 5th Congressional District that stretches along the northern border and was configured mid-decade to give Black voters a chance to elect a candidate of their choice. The district is currently represented by Democratic Rep. Al Lawson.”
 

SmCaudata

Senior member
Oct 8, 2006
968
1,521
136
It seems all of these cases somehow end up going in the favor of R. When dems gerrymander at the state level, the Supreme Court claims they are racially drawing these lines. When the Rs do the same, the Supreme courts uphold the maps. The judiciary is biased and activist. The partisanship of the courts will push our country into totalitarianism.
 

Grey_Beard

Golden Member
Sep 23, 2014
1,825
2,006
136
It seems all of these cases somehow end up going in the favor of R. When dems gerrymander at the state level, the Supreme Court claims they are racially drawing these lines. When the Rs do the same, the Supreme courts uphold the maps. The judiciary is biased and activist. The partisanship of the courts will push our country into totalitarianism.
This is by design. This is why The Turtle did the moves he did, not doing a hearing or vote for Garland, pushing Barrett through with even less time before the election. Gave them two seats to work for minority rule. Roe v. Wade was how they created the enthusiasm for the voters, minority fascist rule was always the end game.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
22,210
15,387
136
It seems all of these cases somehow end up going in the favor of R. When dems gerrymander at the state level, the Supreme Court claims they are racially drawing these lines. When the Rs do the same, the Supreme courts uphold the maps. The judiciary is biased and activist. The partisanship of the courts will push our country into totalitarianism.
The law in all it's majesty has given everyone the right to vote for a Republican of their choice as long as that Republican is to the right of Atilla the Hun.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zinfamous

pete6032

Diamond Member
Dec 3, 2010
6,158
1,771
136
It seems all of these cases somehow end up going in the favor of R. When dems gerrymander at the state level, the Supreme Court claims they are racially drawing these lines. When the Rs do the same, the Supreme courts uphold the maps. The judiciary is biased and activist. The partisanship of the courts will push our country into totalitarianism.
Speak of the devil.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pcgeek11

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
68,668
4,596
126
Them rascals!

I was just reading the same thing in the New York Post. They all do it.
I don't click on NYP articles. It's like Fox so called News. It's a brainwash rag, in my certainly objective opinion. ;)
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
69,151
4,450
126
The Feds need to step in and force some States to establish reasonable Election Laws. Refusing to accept certain States "results" should be announced a year before an Election, so they can fix their error.

Even if there is no Law giving the Feds that power, who TF cares at this point? Trump just spent 4 years flaunting any Rule/Law that was inconvenient, for the sake of counter acting anti-Democratic principles, force these States into a direct confrontation with the issue. I would even ignore the Supreme Court if it tried to intervene, rely on the Public for support and ignore any Institution that refuse to defend these most necessary of Principles, they are Corrupt.
 

Lost_in_the_HTTP

Diamond Member
Nov 17, 2019
6,340
3,715
106
Thsi is why I say districts MUST be drawn by non-partisan commissions and no party should have any say whatsoever.

Districts must be based on geography and population numbers only. Whole counties, or multiple counties as necessary to get equally divided numbers by population. Break down urban areas as necessary by recognized municipal boundaries or geographical features like rivers or railroads.

ABSOLUTELY NO demographics related to party choices, economics, religion, race or otherwise.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
30,058
17,066
136
Thsi is why I say districts MUST be drawn by non-partisan commissions and no party should have any say whatsoever.

Districts must be based on geography and population numbers only. Whole counties, or multiple counties as necessary to get equally divided numbers by population. Break down urban areas as necessary by recognized municipal boundaries or geographical features like rivers or railroads.

ABSOLUTELY NO demographics related to party choices, economics, religion, race or otherwise.
Correct everyone should not do it. Until we can get neutral maps the standard nationwide Democrats cannot continue fighting with 10oz gloves while Republicans break the rules using 5oz. They will just get slaughtered.

We had a chance at that with voting rights reform but guess who killed it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lezunto

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
29,293
5,474
126
Thsi is why I say districts MUST be drawn by non-partisan commissions and no party should have any say whatsoever.

Districts must be based on geography and population numbers only. Whole counties, or multiple counties as necessary to get equally divided numbers by population. Break down urban areas as necessary by recognized municipal boundaries or geographical features like rivers or railroads.

ABSOLUTELY NO demographics related to party choices, economics, religion, race or otherwise
.
You'd be surprised at how often geographical boundaries, race, and economic factors are intertwined.
 

uclaLabrat

Diamond Member
Aug 2, 2007
5,076
1,767
136
Thsi is why I say districts MUST be drawn by non-partisan commissions and no party should have any say whatsoever.

Districts must be based on geography and population numbers only. Whole counties, or multiple counties as necessary to get equally divided numbers by population. Break down urban areas as necessary by recognized municipal boundaries or geographical features like rivers or railroads.

ABSOLUTELY NO demographics related to party choices, economics, religion, race or otherwise.
Thats like asking congress to pass a congressional pay decrease.
 

SmCaudata

Senior member
Oct 8, 2006
968
1,521
136
Thats like asking congress to pass a congressional pay decrease.
Funny thing about that. In MN, lawmakers managed their own pay for years. Democratic voters were okay with this as they avoided raises many years in a row. The conservatives demanded accountability and ended up pushing for an independent body to set the wages. This became a ballot initiative that passed despite the recommendations to vote no by most progressive groups... Anyway that panel immediate gave raises to state lawmakers. Basically, the cons wanted more money and knew they were below market so they convinced the electorate that the dems couldn't be trusted...

Republicans have been very good at manipulating the system and electorate to pass their agendas.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
19,805
6,513
136
Thsi is why I say districts MUST be drawn by non-partisan commissions and no party should have any say whatsoever.

Districts must be based on geography and population numbers only. Whole counties, or multiple counties as necessary to get equally divided numbers by population. Break down urban areas as necessary by recognized municipal boundaries or geographical features like rivers or railroads.

ABSOLUTELY NO demographics related to party choices, economics, religion, race or otherwise.
At least double the size of the HOR while you are at it. Solves a lot of the problem. Not enough representation to spread around.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
22,210
15,387
136
At least double the size of the HOR while you are at it. Solves a lot of the problem. Not enough representation to spread around.
The founders limited the house to 435 members I am sure it is right there in the constitution right next to limiting the number of states to 50 and the scotus to 9 members.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY