Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Supreme Court revisited the concept of partisan gerrymandering claims in Vieth v. Jubelirer (2004). [28] While the Court upheld that partisan gerrymandering could be justiciable, the justices were divided in this specific case as no clear standard against which to evaluate partisan gerrymandering claims emerged.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word's acceptance was marked by its publication in a dictionary (1848) and in an encyclopedia (1868). [14] Since the eponymous Gerry is pronounced with a hard g /ɡ/ as in get , the word gerrymander was originally pronounced / ˈ ɡ ɛr i m æ n d ər / , but pronunciation as / ˈ dʒ ɛr i m æ n ...
Gill v. Whitford, 585 U.S. 48 (2018), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the constitutionality of partisan gerrymandering.Other forms of gerrymandering based on racial or ethnic grounds had been deemed unconstitutional, and while the Supreme Court had identified that extreme partisan gerrymandering could also be unconstitutional, the Court had not agreed on how this could be ...
A federal judge has thrown out the city of Miami’s voting map after ruling that commissioners in 2022 approved unconstitutional, racially gerrymandered district boundaries that sorted city ...
Oct. 15—OHIO — As Ohioans head to the polls this election season, a topic of discussion is Issue 1, a proposed constitutional amendment to overhaul the state's redistricting process. Both ...
Rucho v. Common Cause, No. 18-422, 588 U.S. 684 (2019) is a landmark case of the United States Supreme Court concerning partisan gerrymandering. [1] The Court ruled that while partisan gerrymandering may be "incompatible with democratic principles", the federal courts cannot review such allegations, as they present nonjusticiable political questions outside the jurisdiction of these courts.
Ohioans don't like gerrymandering, which is why both sides of the Issue 1 debate say they have a solution for it.
Bandemer", which had found the issue of partisan gerrymandering within the judiciary's remit: five justices were unwilling to determine that partisan gerrymandering claims were nonjusticiable, instead simply not coming to a clear criteria. In contrast, the District Court's ruling in this case require, according to Smith, factual showings of ...