Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Eugene

(61,872 posts)
Fri Feb 24, 2017, 03:31 PM Feb 2017

Wisconsin attorney general appeals redistricting ruling

Source: Associated Press

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Wisconsin's Republican attorney general filed an appeal Friday with the U.S. Supreme Court challenging a ruling striking down GOP-drawn legislative boundaries as unconstitutional.

Brad Schimel had said he would appeal since a panel of judges last month struck down the maps and ordered the Republican-controlled Legislature to draw new boundaries. The judges ordered that new maps be drawn by November so they would be in place for the 2018 election.

Democrats who challenged the maps are calling on the Legislature to move quickly to draw new ones. But Schimel and Republicans don't want to do that unless the Supreme Court requires it.

Schimel simply filed the notice of appeal on Friday. He does not make any legal arguments and had no comment, spokesman Johnny Koremenos said.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]


Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/41d19425458648d99f6d288b2a4d814d/wisconsin-attorney-general-appeals-redistricting-ruling



By SCOTT BAUER
Feb. 24, 2017 1:57 PM EST
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

StevieM

(10,500 posts)
1. If the Supreme Court rules in the GOP's favor than our democracy may be irreparably damaged.
Fri Feb 24, 2017, 03:41 PM
Feb 2017

If we can't even undo gerrymandering at the state level then we can't undo the gerrymandering of the House of Representatives.

This ruling could be one of the most significant ones in our nation's history.

I can't believe that some people actually believed that it didn't matter too much if Trump was elected rather than Clinton. Scalia was dead and we had an opportunity to replace him.

Skittles

(153,148 posts)
5. Minnesota is where my Norwegion ancestors lived
Fri Feb 24, 2017, 05:55 PM
Feb 2017

I lived there for a while when I was a teenager, although I have to say, using an outhouse at 01:00 AM in January is not my fondest memory

riversedge

(70,187 posts)
6. Damn!! More delay tactics! Gov Walker and Sen Tammy Baldwin are up for Re-election in 2018. Wi is
Fri Feb 24, 2017, 05:57 PM
Feb 2017

severely gerrymandered--and all Repugs have to do is delay it till then!

turbinetree

(24,695 posts)
8. Hey Roberts and your republican minions on the U.S. Supreme Court
Fri Feb 24, 2017, 06:05 PM
Feb 2017

some of us read the book RATF**ked, The Secret Plan to Steal America' Democracy by David Daley.

Just go to Chapter 9 "Wisconsin, "They put my district in the woodchipper" in the book and read what "operatives " did, and then after you read that chapter lets remind everyone what you think of voting and how GOP RedMap gerrymandered districts..................


And let's go back to remember your republican majority courts past ....................


https://www.thenation.com/article/supreme-court-eviscerates-voting-rights-act-texas-voter-id-decision/



http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/colorblind-justice-john-roberts-voting-rights-north-carolina


Shelby County v. Holder
On June 25, 2013, the Supreme Court ruled in Shelby County v. Holder that the coverage formula in Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), which was used to determine the states and political subdivisions subject to Section 5 preclearance, was unconstitutional. Section 5 is the part of the Voting Rights Act that requires certain jurisdictions to demonstrate to either the Attorney General or a federal court in Washington, D.C., that any proposed voting change is not discriminatory, before that change can be implemented. Thus, while the Court did not invalidate the preclearance mechanism in the Voting Rights Act per se, it effectively halted its use by invalidating the formula that determined which places were subject to the preclearance obligation.



There is a link to being RatF**ked and voting and it is a coincidence.








Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Wisconsin attorney genera...