Scalia's death already having positive outcomes: Court lets NC ruling stand

[JEDI]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/20/politics/north-carolina-redistricting-supreme-court/index.html

The Supreme Court late Friday declined to put on hold a lower court ruling that invalidated congressional redistricting maps in North Carolina.

Early this month, a three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina ruled that maps for two districts were unconstitutional, and ordered the state to redraw their lines within two weeks. The panel said that race played an impermissible role in the drawing of the districts.

One election law expert believes that before Justice Antonin Scalia's death the Court would have granted the stay.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

This has really created a big fucking mess here but it's entirely because the Reps in power were banking on a stay and dragging their feet on actually doing anything about it. What's more infuriating is we've had two elections already with illegally drawn districts that gerrymandered a very purple state into putting a 3.33 Republicans to every 1 Democrat into the HoR.

 

[Sonikku]

Figures. Dems hold the popular vote for the House but have less representation in seats. How fucked up is that?

 

[cyclohexane]

Would be hilariously ironic if it turned out Scalia died from a viagra induced heart attack, during a gay tryst for V-day.

 

[HomerJS]

Figures. Dems hold the popular vote for the House but have less representation in seats. How fucked up is that?

The shrinking angry white vote GOP knows they are a long term loser. Instead of kicking out the racists and embracing more policies that appeal to a wider audience the only options are

1. Gerrymander their way into keeping power (as stated lost popular vote last midterm)
2. Enact strict new voting laws that in effect make it more difficult for minorities to vote
3. Keep SC conservative majority.

Which explains the right wing freakout

 

[glenn1]

Strange that race plays an "impermissible role" here when it's actually required to create "majority minority" districts at the same time. I have no real insight into this case but this "pick and choose when race is a factor or not" is stupid.

 

[flexy]

Would be hilariously ironic if it turned out Scalia died from a viagra induced heart attack, during a gay tryst for V-day.

Like we'd EVER know...

 

[theeedude]

Good. GOP is freaking out. Going to lose SCOTUS, then they can't rig elections. The stain of Citizens United gets cleaned out too, no money, no honey

 

[SP33Demon]

Would be hilariously ironic if it turned out Scalia died from a viagra induced heart attack, during a gay tryst for V-day.

Would be hilariously funny if anyone found your post hilariously funny. Scalia had 9 kids with his wife.

Liberals like the OP cling to the dumbest shit. Gerrymandering should always have its limits. Even funnier are the assumptions made by CNN and its "experts" about the vote on this. Nothing but speculation.

 

[SP33Demon]

Good. GOP is freaking out. Going to lose SCOTUS, then they can't rig elections. The stain of Citizens United gets cleaned out too, no money, no honey

Don't put the cart before the horse. Better win the next election.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Don't put the cart before the horse. Better win the next election.

Yeah, because God forbid the senate does their constitutional duty before it.

 

[SP33Demon]

Yeah, because God forbid the senate does their constitutional duty before it.

Their constitutional duty is to ensure a conservative like scalia is appointed to replace him and stat quo preserved. If you don't like it, too bad. Obummer is powerless to do anything about it.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Their constitutional duty is to ensure a conservative like scalia is appointed to replace him and stat quo preserved. If you don't like it, too bad. Obummer is powerless to do anything about it.

Actually this covers their constitutional duty perfectly well:

The President is presumably elected by the people to
carry out a program and altering the ideological directions of
the Supreme Court would seem to be a perfectly legitimate part
of a Presidential platform. To that end, the Constitution gives to
him the power to nominate. As mentioned earlier, if the power
to nominate had been given to the Senate, as was considered
during the debates at the Constitutional Convention, then it
would be proper for the Senate to consider political philosophy.
The proper role of the Senate is to advise and consent to the
particular nomination, and thus, as the Constitution puts it, "to
appoint." This taken within the context of modern times should
mean an examination only into the qualifications of the President's
nominee.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CHRG-REHNQUIST/pdf/GPO-CHRG-REHNQUIST-4-23-1.pdf

Wonder why all of a sudden that doesn't seem to apply now...

 

[Bowfinger]

Their constitutional duty is to ensure a conservative like scalia is appointed to replace him and stat quo preserved. If you don't like it, too bad. Obummer is powerless to do anything about it.

Wrong. That may be their party-over-country agenda. It is sure as hell NOT their Constitutional duty.

 

[kage69]

Would be hilariously funny if anyone found your post hilariously funny. Scalia had 9 kids with his wife.

It's true, I certainly didn't! The inclusion of a gay tryst made the joke somewhat bland, simply too much of that has been happening with social and religious conservatives for it to be edgy.

Now if he had been with an underage black escort and his last words were reputed to have been something along the lines of "Here's your cheddar, chocolate!", well that would be a little different.

The bolded made me laugh too, do you work for Ted Haggard by any chance?

 

[JEDI]

Their (senate repubs) constitutional duty is to ensure a conservative like scalia is appointed to replace him and stat quo preserved.

holy Christ
this is SOOOOOO ignorant and full of stupid I don't even know where to start

 

[kage69]

Wrong. That may be their party-over-country agenda. It is sure as hell NOT their Constitutional duty.

Disgusting how that term (Constitutional duty) has been McConnellized by Banana republicans. Listening to the 'Oppose Obama on Day 1' crowd try to get patriotic about their obstructionist agenda is always entertaining.


I'm glad to see any vestiges of gerrymandering go away, good riddance. The GOP throwing more egg in it's own face with all this crying about the USSC vacancy is a bonus. Fuck entrenched establishment corruption, and fuck hypocrite crybabies. Justice Kennedy getting confirmed proves that is all horseshit. Go for it Turtleman, watch it cost your treasonous ass the Senate.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

The districts are still very gerrymandered. Maybe less so, but maybe not enough to make a difference. For reference, before the 2010 redistrcting, NC reps were 7D to 6R as opposed to the 10R to 3D we have now. So any "well both sides do it" argument only really flies with the ignorant.

 

[Jhhnn]

Wrong. That may be their party-over-country agenda. It is sure as hell NOT their Constitutional duty.

You don't understand. It's the Bundy militia Constitution.

That should help you snap into focus. *click*

 

[emperus]

Their constitutional duty is to ensure a conservative like scalia is appointed to replace him and stat quo preserved. If you don't like it, too bad. Obummer is powerless to do anything about it.

. Must have missed that day in my Government AP class.

 

[michal1980]

Actually this covers their constitutional duty perfectly well:

The President is presumably elected by the people to
carry out a program and altering the ideological directions of
the Supreme Court would seem to be a perfectly legitimate part
of a Presidential platform. To that end, the Constitution gives to
him the power to nominate. As mentioned earlier, if the power
to nominate had been given to the Senate, as was considered
during the debates at the Constitutional Convention, then it
would be proper for the Senate to consider political philosophy.
The proper role of the Senate is to advise and consent to the
particular nomination, and thus, as the Constitution puts it, "to
appoint." This taken within the context of modern times should
mean an examination only into the qualifications of the President's
nominee.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CHRG-REHNQUIST/pdf/GPO-CHRG-REHNQUIST-4-23-1.pdf

Wonder why all of a sudden that doesn't seem to apply now...

Why did Obama vote to filibuster a supreme court justice when he was in senate, and now has a problem with filibustering justices?

Why was Schumer against Bush nominating justices at any point in his presidency, but now pushing for a last minute shot?

 

[michal1980]

The districts are still very gerrymandered. Maybe less so, but maybe not enough to make a difference. For reference, before the 2010 redistrcting, NC reps were 7D to 6R as opposed to the 10R to 3D we have now. So any "well both sides do it" argument only really flies with the ignorant.

Both sides do it. You on the left just double down on denying it.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Haha, thanks for not wasting any time stepping right up to prove my point. As far as the filibuster, you're talking about Alito, the guy sitting on the bench right now, confirmed under the president that appointed him. So thanks for that chuckle too.

 

[shortylickens]

The shrinking angry white vote GOP knows they are a long term loser. Instead of kicking out the racists and embracing more policies that appeal to a wider audience the only options are

1. Gerrymander their way into keeping power (as stated lost popular vote last midterm)
2. Enact strict new voting laws that in effect make it more difficult for minorities to vote
3. Keep SC conservative majority.

Which explains the right wing freakout

Like being a legal citizen with no felonies?






OH SHIT! HE WENT THERE!!