The Supreme Court will get another chance in its next term to decide the long-unresolved question of whether partisan gerrymandering violates the Constitution. In a new order in a North Carolina case, a lower federal court on Wednesday put that case on a fast track to reach the Justices even as their new term opens in early October.
On July 6, 1854, disgruntled voters in a new political party named its first candidates to contest the Democrats over the issue of slavery. Within six and one-half years, the newly christened Republican Party would control the White House and Congress as the Civil War began.
The Supreme Court, showing once again its reluctance to take a bold step to put some limits on the decades-long practice of “partisan gerrymandering,” voted on Monday to keep the courthouse doors open to challenging the practice and edged a bit closer to a definition of the constitutional harm it may cause.
A divided Supreme Court on Monday allowed the state of Ohio’s voter-registration list maintenance policies to remain in place, reversing a federal appeals court ruling.
Does the First Amendment protect messages on clothing people wear when casting their votes at polling places? That’s a complicated question the Supreme Court will answer sometime this month.
On May 28, 1861, Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger Taney directly challenged President Abraham Lincoln’s wartime suspension of the great writ of habeas corpus, in a national constitutional showdown.
For more than three decades, some members of the Supreme Court have thought the courts should do something to rein in the centuries-old practice of partisan gerrymandering – that is, drawing election districts to give one party’s candidates a clear advantage. But none of the Justices have thought they knew what to do about it.
A deliberate effort by Maryland’s Democratic leaders to take a congressional seat away from Republicans might be just the kind of “partisan gerrymander” that the Supreme Court could now be ready to rule unconstitutional. But would that clarify anything about how much partisanship in drawing new election maps is too much?
The state of California will sue the Trump administration over the upcoming 2020 census and its inclusion of a question about U.S. citizenship, California state attorney general Xavier Becerra said Monday night.
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear its second gerrymandering or political redistricting case of its current term. This time, it is the Republicans who claim they suffered a First Amendment rights violation in Maryland.