I hope Newsom is correct that the challenge will fail. But now, we have to worry about how long it will take for it to be adjudicated in court, and whether the law can go into effect in time. And even if it eventually survives court review and appeals, will courts place a restraining order to prevent it from going into effect before December 19, the date when candidates can start collecting voters’ signatures to lower the costs of their filing fee? It’s essentially the first step in officially running in the 2026 midterm elections. That's also worrisome!
And why couldn't a similar lawsuit have been filed against the Texas gerrymandering redistricting law?
I have little confidence in the fairness of the current, Trump owned Supreme court. They would probably approve the Republican effort and disapprove the similar Democrat effort, ignoring that the Texas law is at least as likely to be based on racial bias as is the California law.
No precept or claim is more suspect or more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
I hope Newsom is correct that the challenge will fail. But now, we have to worry about how long it will take for it to be adjudicated in court, and whether the law can go into effect in time. And even if it eventually survives court review and appeals, will courts place a restraining order to prevent it from going into effect before December 19, the date when candidates can start collecting voters’ signatures to lower the costs of their filing fee? It’s essentially the first step in officially running in the 2026 midterm elections. That's also worrisome!
And why couldn't a similar lawsuit have been filed against the Texas gerrymandering redistricting law?
I have little confidence in the fairness of the current, Trump owned Supreme court. They would probably approve the Republican effort and disapprove the similar Democrat effort, ignoring that the Texas law is at least as likely to be based on racial bias as is the California law.
This Prop 50 situation, and the Texas situation, are squeaky wheels I suppose. Both situations, to me, are reactionary symptoms to what has been going on in Massachusetts, New Mexico, Utah and other states. I don't think it will stop unless we have a constitutional amendment requiring districts to follow county lines or a goddamn river. This BS spaghetti districting is a joke.
This Prop 50 situation, and the Texas situation, are squeaky wheels I suppose. Both situations, to me, are reactionary symptoms to what has been going on in Massachusetts, New Mexico, Utah and other states. I don't think it will stop unless we have a constitutional amendment requiring districts to follow county lines or a goddamn river. This BS spaghetti districting is a joke.
I can't help but agree with you there. I would prefer something like that or multi partisan independent commissions to draw up fair and pragmatic district boundaries.
No precept or claim is more suspect or more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
This Prop 50 situation, and the Texas situation, are squeaky wheels I suppose. Both situations, to me, are reactionary symptoms to what has been going on in Massachusetts, New Mexico, Utah and other states. I don't think it will stop unless we have a constitutional amendment requiring districts to follow county lines or a goddamn river. This BS spaghetti districting is a joke.
I can't help but agree with you there. I would prefer something like that or multi partisan independent commissions to draw up fair and pragmatic district boundaries.
A committee to make committees to commission commissioning committees is what we have already committed to. I say to hell with it. County lines, state lines and rivers. The end.
I can't help but agree with you there. I would prefer something like that or multi partisan independent commissions to draw up fair and pragmatic district boundaries.
A committee to make committees to commission commissioning committees is what we have already committed to. I say to hell with it. County lines, state lines and rivers. The end.
At first glance, this could be less subject to gerrymandering, but that problem will still exist. There are over 3100 counties in the US. Some have populations of less than 100 people. In order to adhere to the current setup in the House, many counties will be combined, which can lead to some shenanigans. And legal mandates for equal population in federal districts are problematic when considering urban counties with large populations, so they’ll need to be split anyway.
A committee to make committees to commission commissioning committees is what we have already committed to. I say to hell with it. County lines, state lines and rivers. The end.
At first glance, this could be less subject to gerrymandering, but that problem will still exist. There are over 3100 counties in the US. Some have populations of less than 100 people. In order to adhere to the current setup in the House, many counties will be combined, which can lead to some shenanigans. And legal mandates for equal population in federal districts are problematic when considering urban counties with large populations, so they’ll need to be split anyway.
That's the whole point. Find a county line and draw the damn boundary. Want to split Harris or Cook or some big county? Great, find a river and a county line and get your pencils out. No more BS. Hell, these ranked choice communists can have three reps in Cook and Harris, just find a county line and a river and draw the damn things.
Okay, cammy. Look, if you want to make these little nursery rhymes stick, you need to weave a bit of truth into them. It is a waste to spend all that time finding a word that rhymes with sad, but then to just rant lies again. Keep trying though, k?
