A gerrymandering case out of Texas serves to further prove the point that the judiciary is rigging the game against Republican candidates — and it’s all completely legal.
Late Friday, a panel of federal judges threw out three of Texas’ congressional districts — because racism. This further highlights how the federal judiciary is using provisions of the Voting Rights Act to rig elections in favor of Democrat candidates.
According to a report at NPR:
Judges Xavier Rodriguez and Orlando Garcia wrote the court’s decision, which comes after a protracted and complex legal battle that began when the new districts were drawn in 2011, following the last census.
“The political motive does not excuse or negate that use of race; rather, the use of race is ultimately problematic for precisely that reason — because of their political motive, they intentionally drew a district based on race in a location where such use of race was not justified by a compelling state interest,” says the ruling.
Politically motivated redistricting is legal, but redistricting with an intent to reduce the influence of minority voters — either by “packing” those voters into a district, or “cracking” them among multiple districts — is not.
More troubling is that the ruling goes after both practices of political redistricting (packing and cracking) and throw both out, alleging to discern racial animus amongst the political — even though the political was most clear. (What gifted mind-readers in black robes we have at our disposal!)
So there is literally no way to draw districts in a political fashion without a federal judge being able to cry racist and kick the maps out.
What’s truly laughable is that the state maps of Maryland and Illinois – which are infamously rigged in favor of Democrat politicians – remain wholly unchallenged despite some of the absurd-looking districts on their maps. But, details …
Even if as many GOP politicians were legitimately racist as liberals claim, the Left tends to forget what politicians really love: winning elections. Any sensible politician will draw a map that maximizes their chances of winning, regardless of race. You may not like it, but it’s legal, constitutional, and how things have been done since ratification.
As Daniel Horowitz and I explained in a previous, more comprehensive piece on the subject:
Then there is the reality that contrary to breaking up demographic constituencies, many of the maps pull them together. One could statistically argue that such districts would actually give minorities a statistical punch above their weight in Congress than if the lines were drawn otherwise.
When a minority votes near-monolithically for one party and lives in geographically distinct enough areas to be lumped together via gerrymandering, of course that is the result of intentional action. That’s not racially motivated; it’s party motivated. How much smaller would the Congressional Black Caucus be if those districts weren’t drawn as such?
First, in order for the courts to rule that maps drawn with political intent are racially discriminatory, they assumed that minorities are going to monolithically vote for Democrats every single time. This is a false assumption and just bad law when one realizes that the whole of American political history displays the continual birth, death, and realignment of political coalitions.
If you grant one voter bloc a new constitutional right to maximize their potential, then why not grant another bloc (of another demographic) the same constitutional right? What about white rural voters? What about white rural voters in blue states (listed above) who have also had their representation sliced up? Why is nobody crying “foul” and “racism” over them?
So, because Republicans often have enjoy atrocious election results among some racial demographics, any effort to draw a constitutional map that isn’t suicidal will look racially motivated. However, as much as Democrats do everything they can to shame black people out of even entertaining the idea of voting Republican, the amount of melanin in your skin does not dictate your political party.
Simply put, there’s no way to draw a district map without someone being able to claim disappointment or “disenfranchisement.” This is why these are political questions — not ones for unelected judges, unaccountable election commissions, or (per a recent suggestion) the robots.
There’s only one question remaining about the current redistricting scenario: Where is Congress?
Since several states are losing a constitutionally enumerated power at the hands of the judiciary — based off the interpretation of a law that usurped that power — it would only make sense that the branch that started the problem clean up its own mess by either clarifying what the courts’ power over the states are, or repealing the outdated provisions of the act (or the whole thing) altogether.
Until then, Democrats have a handy way to pick the lock and rig the system on future elections, and it’s only going to get worse. (For more from the author of “Texas Redistricting Case Makes It Official: Courts Are Rigging the Game … And It’s Entirely Legal” please click HERE)