Supreme Court to Wash DC - NO congressional voting representation for you people...

[msongs]

"The Supreme Court on Monday affirmed an earlier ruling that D.C. is not constitutionally entitled to voting representation in Congress, deflating hopes among some advocates that they could secure representation for District residents through the courts rather than through legislation."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/10/04/supreme-court-dc-congress-vote/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wp_local

[edhopper]

1. That would be a big step

even for a liberal court.

[qazplm135]

2. It's the right judicial result

this is a problem Congress needs to fix, not the courts.

Make it a state or shrink DC down to literally the area involving the National Mall, WH, Congress, Supreme Court and a few other critical government buildings.

[PortTack]

4. That sounds like the best resolution...for now

[Celerity]

8. that is what the DC statehood bills do

shrink DC down to literally the area involving the National Mall, WH, Congress, Supreme Court and a few other critical government buildings.

an example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statehood_movement_in_the_District_of_Columbia

The Washington, D.C. Admission Act would create the state of "Washington, Douglass Commonwealth" (named after Frederick Douglass). As a state, the Douglass Commonwealth would receive two Senators and representation in the House of Representatives based on population (a single representative would be apportioned for the foreseeable future). The admission act would carve out a smaller federal district, dubbed "the Capital"; this would consist of the White House, U.S. Capitol, other federal buildings, the National Mall, and its monuments. The bill included a section creating faster procedures for repealing the Twenty-third Amendment, which grants the district three electoral votes in presidential elections.

The bill also repeals Section 21, Title 3 of the US Code, dealing with presidential elections, which for the purposes of the election of the President and Vice President, "State" includes the District of Columbia. Were the Twenty-third Amendment not to be repealed, the small district remaining as the seat of government would retain three Electoral College votes, and Congress would need to legislate a means of appointing electors, as the amendment requires, with one possibility being awarding them to the winner of the popular vote.

IF the 3 'Capital' EV's went to the popular vole winner, The Dem candidate would likely always get them, as it is pretty much a given we will win the popular vote (unless we nominate a shit candidate and the Rethugs ditch the white power Trump formula, which is now very unlikely for the foreseeable future)

the Rethugs have only won the popular vote once (2004) since the 1980's

Bush was the first, and as of 2021 the only, Republican candidate since his father in the 1988 election to win a majority or plurality of the popular vote. Bush's victory also marked the first and only time that the nominee of a major party won a presidential election without winning any electoral votes from the Northeast while also the last time a candidate won all Southern states. It also marks the final time to date that a Republican presidential nominee has won the states of Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Virginia.

[madville]

9. It would make more sense to make all the residential areas parts of

Part of either VA or MD. I know people want two more Senators they assume will be Democrats but if actually achieving representation is the goal then becoming part of the two closest states would be the path of lessor resistance.

[Funtatlaguy]

3. We need DC and PR statehood.

[PortTack]

5. DC yes, and I know PR wants statehood, but they are like the Cubans in FL...pretty red

[exboyfil]

6. Even if red their population is more than Iowa

I think they should have statehood.

[PortTack]

7. Agree...just saying we need to understand their political makeup

[Celerity]

13. yes, we would have a real risk of two Rethug Senators and as many as 4 Rethug House members

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/09/09/puerto-rico-statehood-politics-democrats-republicans-senate-409191

“People in the continental U.S. think that Puerto Ricans are going to vote Democratic, but on the other hand, the conservative values and Latin traditions are more akin to the values of a Republican Party,” said José Garriga Picó, a political scientist and former member of the Puerto Rican Legislature. “You can’t really predict what voters are going to do here.”

Both major island wide elected officials in Puerto Rico are registered Republicans, as is the sitting governor, who was installed by the island’s Supreme Court. Puerto Rico’s Legislature, which has made a mark in recent years by enacting conservative laws including restrictions on abortion and expressions of gender identity, is led by registered Republicans in both its House and Senate. Seven of the past eight elections for governor or resident commissioner were won by members of the New Progressive Party, the more conservative of the island’s main parties—including the territory’s current nonvoting member of Congress, Jenniffer González-Colón, who is a member of the NPP, the chairwoman of the Puerto Rican Republican Party and a former co-chair of Latinos for Trump.

[abqtommy]

10. snark alert on: I lost my voting representation at The Supreme Court and didn't

even get a roll of paper towels! alert off

[StarfishSaver]

11. Important to note...

While the Court ruled that there is no constitutional requirement that DC residents have voting rights, it did NOT rule that Congress could not grant that right to them - and even left the impression that Congress could indeed do so.

The ruling has little bearing on the ongoing fight for D.C. statehood, however, and does not preclude Congress from passing a law that would grant the District a vote in the national legislature. The ruling only affirms the finding, by a three-judge panel made up of federal judges in D.C., that Congress is not constitutionally required to do so.
...
[T]he ruling the Supreme Court affirmed mentioned that Congress could legally grant voting rights to D.C., even though it is not constitutionally required to.

[brooklynite]

12. Which was the correct ruling...

PEOPLE do not have the right to Senators and Representatives. STATES do. Congress can create a State among the non-Governmental portions of DC, or add the land to Virginia or Maryland.