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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


(3,659 posts)
23. Even if as others have noted it wasn't explicitly permitted...
Sat Dec 11, 2021, 11:39 PM
Dec 2021

...and you did want to ban gerrymandering, defining it in a legally precise way so that you could take action against offenders would be difficult. There are a number of different ways to do a gerrymander, some more subtle than others. It's one of those things where the harder you work to pin it down, the more creative people are going to be trying to get around the restrictions.

Why isn't gerrymandering illegal [View all] Tribetime Dec 2021 OP
About 10 years ago, Dems & Reps in NJ got together and set up each district as safe zones. TheBlackAdder Dec 2021 #1
Link? zaj Dec 2021 #2
Link here. It walk talked on the TV and Radio for a couple of years, esp. NJ1015.com TheBlackAdder Dec 2021 #4
"Democrats" aren't a protected class, so they use "race" as a proxy. zaj Dec 2021 #3
Yeah, Oklahoma ymetca Dec 2021 #5
Scotus has ruled it is legal iemanja Dec 2021 #6
American supreme Court seems to error on the side of less democracy when it comes to voting uponit7771 Dec 2021 #7
Yes, and I'm afraid we'll see that confirmed iemanja Dec 2021 #8
You have to remember Zeitghost Dec 2021 #15
Yes, but what about explicitly anti-democratic and explicitly intended to favour one party? Alexander Of Assyria Dec 2021 #10
They have said that is okay iemanja Dec 2021 #13
Here is a news story about the ruling. iemanja Dec 2021 #17
Thank you. Well, that's just wrong thinking by the majority. Political thinking. Not their job. Alexander Of Assyria Dec 2021 #18
Define represented "fairly" brooklynite Dec 2021 #9
One person one vote, equal representation in legislative body based on population Alexander Of Assyria Dec 2021 #11
"In a logically geographic perimeter"....there's the rub brooklynite Dec 2021 #14
No, but nothing bans it either. So legislatures can do, no problem, including the federal level. Alexander Of Assyria Dec 2021 #19
It seems all my post oh nevermind I fixed it Tribetime Dec 2021 #28
Because both sides do it. Zeitghost Dec 2021 #12
The Voting Rights Act requires it to some extent MichMan Dec 2021 #16
Becuase the Founding Fathers decide it was OK. Jacson6 Dec 2021 #20
The "Founding Fathers" did not have a clue...says Stu Stuart G Dec 2021 #25
They also bought and sold humans. They also settled arguments by duel. Progressive Jones Dec 2021 #27
Chief Justice edhopper Dec 2021 #21
Elections and election laws are decided state by state. That is in the constitution. AJT Dec 2021 #22
Even if as others have noted it wasn't explicitly permitted... localroger Dec 2021 #23
+1000 smirkymonkey Dec 2021 #24
Be careful what you ask for thatdemguy Dec 2021 #26
It shouldn't favor one party or another every voter vote must be equally represented Tribetime Dec 2021 #29
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why isn't gerrymandering ...»Reply #23