BREAKING NEWS CNN: U.S. Supreme Court to review Republican-friendly Texas congression

[Winslowalrob]

The Supreme Court also agrees with this. Every majority-minority districting case that made it to the Supreme Court during Clinton's Presidency resulted in the plan being struck down: Shaw v. Reno, Miller v. Johnson, and Bush v. Vera all overturned Democratic attempts to redraw district lines to favor minorities.

So twa, it is not legal to draw up a district solely to help a minority candidate win. The standard the Supreme Court has used is that "the plaintiffs must prove that other, legitimate districting principles were subordinated to race. By that, we mean that race must be the predominant factor motivating the legislature’s redistricting decision." Bush v. Vera, 517 U.S. 952 (1996).

The standard for minority vote dilution is similar, applied according to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965: "No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or political subdivision in a manner which results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color." The Court generally compares the challenged policy with "a reasonable alternative practice as a benchmark against which to measure the existing voting practice." Holder v. Hall, 512 U.S. 874 (1994).

It will be interesting to see how this case turns out. The race-based districting cases have generally turned on O'Connor's vote, but I don't really see things changing too much in that area. The question is whether Roberts and Alito are more willing to venture into the arena of political gerrymandering, which is an area that the traditional conservatives on the Court (O'Connor and Rehnquist included) seemed reluctant to touch.

So would judicial activism help?

Sorry, could not resist asking.