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

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
Wed Mar 5, 2014, 10:50 PM Mar 2014

Retired Supreme Court Justice Calls For Constitutional Amendment To Prevent Partisan Gerrymandering


Retired Supreme Court Justice Calls For Constitutional Amendment To Prevent Partisan Gerrymandering

Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has a new book out, in which he proposes six potential amendments to the Constitution — including one to prevent lawmakers from drawing legislative maps intended to entrench their own party in power:

Districts represented by members of Congress, or by members of any state legislative body, shall be compact and composed of contiguous territory. The state shall have the burden of justifying any departures from this requirement by reference to neutral criteria such as natural, political, or historical boundaries or demographic changes. The interest in enhancing or preserving the political power of the party in control of the state government is not such a neutral criterion.

As a practical matter, this (or any other constitutional amendment) is unlikely to be ratified. Amending the Constitution is slightly easier than attempting to catch a unicorn, but really not so much easier that it is likely to matter. Because of the sweeping consensus required to amend the Constitution — even if an amendment bypasses the normal procedure, which requires a 2/3s supermajority in both houses of Congress, it still must be ratified by 3/4s of the states — no amendment can be ratified if either major political party opposes it. And, for the moment, the Republican Party has six very good reasons not to support an anti-gerrymandering amendment:

-snip-

Full article here: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/03/05/3363191/retired-supreme-court-justice-calls-for-constitutional-amendment-to-prevent-partisan-gerrymandering/#



A LIST of the six proposals, here: http://joshblackman.com/blog/2014/03/04/what-are-justice-stevenss-proposed-six-amendments/


6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Retired Supreme Court Justice Calls For Constitutional Amendment To Prevent Partisan Gerrymandering (Original Post) Tx4obama Mar 2014 OP
Stevens was a great Justice. I miss him being on the Court. nt SunSeeker Mar 2014 #1
Great proposals. I especially like these two: JDPriestly Mar 2014 #2
I'm glad he's speaking out... CBHagman Mar 2014 #3
Gerrymandering is a monstrously effective way to deprive us of democracy daybranch Mar 2014 #4
Justice Stevens is a true American. santamargarita Mar 2014 #5
Got mine on preorder dsteve01 Mar 2014 #6

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
2. Great proposals. I especially like these two:
Thu Mar 6, 2014, 02:04 AM
Mar 2014

Campaign Finance – Neither the First Amendment nor any other provision of this Constitution shall be construed to prohibit the Congress or any state from imposing reasonable limits on the amount of money that candidates for public office, or their supporters, may spend in election campaigns.

The Second Amendment – (Amend the 2nd Amendment) A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.

http://joshblackman.com/blog/2014/03/04/what-are-justice-stevenss-proposed-six-amendments/

CBHagman

(16,984 posts)
3. I'm glad he's speaking out...
Thu Mar 6, 2014, 08:38 AM
Mar 2014

...though, as noted above, the passage of a constitutional amendment of any sort is an uphill battle. But attention must be paid.

daybranch

(1,309 posts)
4. Gerrymandering is a monstrously effective way to deprive us of democracy
Thu Mar 6, 2014, 09:26 AM
Mar 2014

While I agree with the idea of compactness and contiguous, it is in actuality competition that assures the will of the majority is done. Without assuring that competition , you do not achieve democracy. If you determine that equal numbers of districts should be of each party, you have again taken away democracy. Without democracy you open the door and welcome corruption and extremism to reign.
According to the League of Women Voters, 106 of our 109 legislative districts in Ohio were determined by Gerrymandering. Furthermore although there were about even numbers of votes cast for each of the major parties, due to Gerrymandering we have 12 republicans and only 4 Democrats in the US House of Representatives.
We have a MoveOn petition asking people to pledge to fight Gerrymandering with over 600 signatures so far. Please add your name and pledge with us. The link is http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/gerrymandering-in-ohio?source=c.fwd&r_by=99591

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Retired Supreme Court Jus...