Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

grandjean87

Moore v Harper

Recommended Posts

On 11/3/2022 at 8:15 AM, grandjean87 said:

You are arguing more on a different subject matter.  You know, MWCboarding.  

I get the relationship.  I mentioned I have concerns (a few posts up if read carefully).  I'm familiar with  state legislatures balance of party power.  I'm aware, and have posted in the past of the post-2020 redistricting, of the smaller number of competitive seats compared to post-2010. I've read through the mounds of data of the Princeton Project https://gerrymander.princeton.edu/, and more. I've also seen analysis indicating 2022 has a more fair CD map than 1982.    

None of that matters to how Moore v Harper will be decided.  All the above may matter after the decision.  I'm focused mostly on the former. 

Good that you read the article showing how balanced the briefs are for the respondents. But, I'm not sure why reading it seems to be another reason for all your related fears?  Its analysis is good news.  Did you miss that?
https://www.justsecurity.org/83831/as-moore-v-harper-takes-shape-a-broad-coalition-takes-aim-at-the-independent-state-legislature-theory/

Look, if you want to focus on an uber-gerrymandered future and supercomputers -- note: the Princeton Project uses them to do their massive mounds of data collection and scoring of the states -- go right ahead.  MWCboard away to your heart's content. 

 

I think we are talking apples and oranges here.  

First off we both agree the redistricting process for states will be unaffected and that the risk of state super majorities doesn’t exist.

Yes we agree the legal establishment agrees the arguments are without merit.  Though I’m still open to a charity bet that at least two judges join a minority opinion in favor of the plaintiffs.  
 

Were we are in disagreement is your point that even if the court majority signs with the plaintiffs the supremacy clause would allow Congress to override the states.  My argument is the House will become a permanently Republican body and no over riding by Congress would ever happen.  

But as I type this I see the fallacy in my argument… as long as the state legislatures are subject to the courts …. eventually the states could flip Dem and then they could flip the gerrymander from 10-4 R’s to 10-4 Dems.   But the Supremacy clause still won’t matter.  What will happen is the state representation is going to swing wildly based on who controls the state.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/3/2022 at 4:25 AM, Spaztecs said:

You're the only one on this Board with an Imagination fixation.

No one else brings up this song but you.

Who has the fixation, knucklehead ?

The point is if you like that song, you are not a deep thinker.  You are shallow at best or an idiot at worst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/3/2022 at 3:31 PM, sactowndog said:

I think we are talking apples and oranges here.  

First off we both agree the redistricting process for states will be unaffected and that the risk of state super majorities doesn’t exist.

Yes we agree the legal establishment agrees the arguments are without merit.  Though I’m still open to a charity bet that at least two judges join a minority opinion in favor of the plaintiffs.  
 

Were we are in disagreement is your point that even if the court majority signs with the plaintiffs the supremacy clause would allow Congress to override the states.  My argument is the House will become a permanently Republican body and no over riding by Congress would ever happen.  

But as I type this I see the fallacy in my argument… as long as the state legislatures are subject to the courts …. eventually the states could flip Dem and then they could flip the gerrymander from 10-4 R’s to 10-4 Dems.   But the Supremacy clause still won’t matter.  What will happen is the state representation is going to swing wildly based on who controls the state.  

Fair and good points.

I am of the opinion that the extreme version of the ISL theory will not be the ruling of the Court.  I don't see the votes for that. Two dissents? Sure.  Parsing the power of the NC state court over their legislature is most likely to result in that 90-10 win Judge Luttig so opined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/3/2022 at 3:38 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

The point is if you like that song, you are not a deep thinker.  You are shallow at best or an idiot at worst.

No, the of my post is your an obtuse dipshit.

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This seems to be the key to what I have read here and elsewhere:

"But even conservative justices who had previously voiced some sympathy with the independent state legislature theory seemed frustrated with Thompson’s insistence on making aggressive arguments for legislative power instead of offering more measured interpretations. The real intellectual energy of the argument focused on just how the Court might sketch a narrower vision of the independent state legislature theory that could provide some level of increased freedom for legislatures without fully unleashing state lawmakers to do their worst. Conservative Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh, along with Chief Justice John Roberts, seemed notably interested in this approach."

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/12/moore-harper-scotus-independent-state-legislature/672399/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The Supreme Court signals that a terrifying attack on voting rights will vanish — for now

Moore v. Harper endangers elections in the United States. Now it seems likely to disappear.

Quote

On Thursday, the justices signaled that they are likely to take an off-ramp from this case. The Court released a brief, one-paragraph order indicating that this case may simply disappear.

https://www.vox.com/politics/2023/3/2/23622717/supreme-court-moore-harper-anti-democracy-case-elections

"We don't have evidence but, we have lot's of theories."

Americans Mayor

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...