Courts get political in tussle over redistricting
Published December 24, 2015
Editorial by Fayetteville Observer, December 23, 2015.
We really would have enjoyed being surprised by this one. Unfortunately, the members of the N.C. Supreme Court voted in completely partisan fashion to again uphold the redistricting maps that the Republican-led General Assembly created in 2011.
The Republicans who hold the majority on the court said they found no problem with the creation of minority voting districts that pack in African-American voters at levels that exceed 50 percent. The GOP mapmakers argued that they drew the maps that way to ensure compliance with federal law. They would likely prefer that no one question what happened in the districts around those irregularly shaped black districts: They became overwhelmingly white and Republican, making it somewhere between difficult and impossible to break the party's grip on the General Assembly and its dominance of the state's congressional delegation.
Now, longstanding U.S. Supreme Court rulings affirm that redistricting is political in nature, and that it's OK for a party to create maps favorable to itself. But not, federal courts are beginning to rule, when it compromises minorities' representation.
That's why this case - in which former state Sen. Margaret Dickson of Fayetteville is lead plaintiff - is headed back to the U.S. Supreme Court again.
The case is a good example of the pervasiveness of politics in places, like the courts, where it doesn't belong. Even though the case was about politics, the decision should have been about the Constitution and the law. The party-line vote in the state Supreme Court tells us that it wasn't.
It tells us something else, too: Letting politicians do redistricting will always produce this result. It was that way when Democrats ruled Raleigh and it's that way on the Republican watch. Party hackery will defeat fairness and equal political opportunity every time.
It will, that is, until this state joins others that have created nonpartisan redistricting commissions, like the one a bipartisan North Carolina legislative group has promoted and sponsored for the past few years.
Whether or not it's done legally, gerrymandering produces ugly, bizarrely shaped districts that guarantee constituents won't be well served, but political interests will. It's long past time for our American democracy to grow up and grow out of this redistricting gamesmanship. Let the politicians stand aside and hand the mapmaking software to nonpartisan professionals.
December 24, 2015 at 10:16 am
Norm Kelly says:
Here's a striking alternative view of the court case decision.
In a shocking turn of events, Democrats on the court sided with the liberal wing of the Democrat party by claiming that only liberal Democrat politicians are qualified to decide exactly how many blacks in a district are the right number of blacks. In the same decision, liberal Democrat members of the court have decided that unless liberal Democrat politicians are creators of districts, then the districts are by default racist. Even though Democrats are the majority by a decision of the majority of voters, the court has decided that the minority is the preferred decision maker in the case of racism and discrimination. You see, there's a proper number of blacks to be considered fair and an improper number of blacks that warrants the 'racist' label. As has been proven since Democrats stood in the way of anti-discrimination laws back in the 1960's that only Democrat politicians understand racism, bias, and fairness toward the repressed minorities in the black community.
How's that for an alternative view?
But, the important part to remember is that the liberal wing of the Demoncrat party has not changed it's stance on blacks since the 1960's. Not only did Democrats fight tooth & nail to prevent equal-rights legislation for blacks, it was Demons who made up the majority of KKK membership, some of whom were elected to political office for decades. But it's also true that Demons have stood in the way of blacks standing on their own 2 feet. Every time someone comes along to say that blacks actually are capable people, some liberal steps out of the shadows to refute that argument. If the person who claims blacks are capable happens to be a white person, they are immediately labeled a racist and if possible their source of income is destroyed. If the person claiming that blacks are capable people happens to be black, they are immediately labeled an uncle Tom. And their reputation is destroyed. Heck, libs even target children of political opponents. When someone had the audacity to make a cartoon the current occupiers children, they were roasted by the lame-stream media and their source of income was targeted. But when the liberal media prints a cartoon of Ted's kids, a simple apology is supposed to be enough. Libs are simply a sad group of people. What's bad for conservatives/Republicans is fair game for libs. What's considered racist for a conservative/Republican is considered 'helping', 'loving', 'kindly', and appropriate for a liberal. Claim some black or a group of blacks, or blacks in general are not capable of getting through life without your help and you are a racist. Unless you are a lib, then you are considered loving, kind, compassionate, and big-hearted. It matters NOT to a lib that their policies actually hold black people back from making personal progress. And it appears not to matter to the majority of black leaders that their liberal allies are holding back the majority of blacks. Witness how the lame-stream media fawns over the local Rev Buffet Slayer whenever he opens his mouth. Doesn't matter that the majority of his claims are bogus, not based on facts, and repressive toward the people he claims to support, it's that his words are in line with the liberal, socialist, Demoncrat party. Therefore, his heart is in the right place and he must be given credit for his love!
How about the case was lost in court multiple times, so it's time for the libs to concede defeat?! Do libs EVER concede defeat when their policies/schemes are thwarted? No. If libs can't get their policies passed through legislative means, they use the courts to force their schemes upon the unsuspecting masses. Cuz libs believe they know better how to manage my life than I do.
