Last week, a three-judge court in North Carolina did the unthinkable: it struck down a state redistricting plan on partisan gerrymandering grounds. This plucky little court held, in light of the overwhelming factual record chock-full of crass and extreme examples of partisan behavior, that the plan violated the law. Doing the heavy lifting was a…
Tag: judicial review
World Cup refereeing as constitutional interpretation
The World Cup is underway in Russia, and not a game goes by when I am not reminded of our very own US Supreme Court and how it interprets the Constitution. This cartoon from the Guardian neatly captures why: This is constitutional interpretation in a nutshell. (If you don’t believe me, read yesterday’s Gill v. Whitford decision…
Initial thoughts on Gill v. Whitford, the Wisconsin Gerrymandering Case
The US Supreme published its long-awaited decision in the Wisconsin gerrymandering case, Gill v. Whitford. Gill could have been a landmark decision about American Democracy. But the Court declined the invitation and sent the case back to the lower court to give plaintiffs the chance “to prove concrete and particularized injuries using evidence . ….
Looking for Consistency in Chief Justice Roberts’ Chambers
Something is going on in the chambers of Chief Justice Roberts. Last October, in the oral argument for Gill v. Whitford, the Wisconsin political gerrymandering case, the Chief Justice provocatively explained that “if you’re the intelligent man on the street,” you will know that the case will come down to the fact that the Court…
