SUPREME COURT/VOTING: “The Supreme Court heard arguments on Tuesday [10-3-17] in a case that could reshape American democracy by considering whether extreme partisan gerrymandering — the drawing of voting districts to give lopsided advantages to the party in power — violates the Constitution.
The Supreme Court has never struck down an election map on the ground that it was drawn to make sure one political party wins an outsize number of seats. The court has, however, left open the possibility that some kinds of political gamesmanship in redistricting may be too extreme…
On Tuesday, lawyers for the state of Wisconsin urged the justices to reject such a challenge to that state’s redistricting map, drawn by the Republican-controlled government, saying that Democratic critics were relying on flimsy and hypothetical social science evidence to prove that the maps led to the unconstitutional advantage of one party over the other…
Justice Elena Kagan said there is ‘good evidence’ that the maps drawn by the Republicans in Wisconsin were designed to have ‘a certain kind of an effect, which was to entrench a party in power.’
Justice Kagan also pressed the state’s lawyers to explain their criticism of the social scientists who have concluded that the maps are overly partisan. She noted that lawmakers use the same technology and social science to draw the maps in the first place.”
-Adam Liptak and Michael D. Shear, “Supreme Court Hears ‘Good Evidence’ Voting Maps Entrenched a Party in Power, Justice Says,” The New York Times online, Oct. 3, 2017