this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2023
29 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
561 readers
1 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's a possibility. This case followed a delay where the Court voted to allow the now-rejected maps to be used in 2022. There's a loose standard around whether an unfair map can be used. Realistically, we're far out enough that every state should be able to redistrict in time for 2024. But a lot depends on the lower courts, because what will likely happen is that the states will cheerfully submit different maps that are just as imbalanced, and we'll have to watch multiple rounds of court orders, new maps, appeals, and so fourth. In some cases, courts have given an ultimatum: Provide a fair map, or we'll appoint an independent committee to provide one for you. So that's one way out of the morass, it's just a matter of whether or not the judges involved will go that route, and whether or not SCOTUS will defer to the lower courts when the appeal gets that high.