A few questions on the redistricting issue/cases. As I understand it, SCOTUS has stated that partisan gerrymandering is non justiciable at the federal court level:
1. Is it still justiciable at the state level? Or did Calais in some way remove state court review as well?
2. Since partisan gerrymandering is not reviewable at the federal level, through a partisan gerrymander could a state:
At least as a matter of state law, states can regulate partisan gerrymandering and state courts can enforce those regulations.
Both the one-person/one-vote doctrine and probably Article I, Section 2 would forbid putting people in no district at all.
I'm not so sure about non-contiguous districts. I've seen it asserted that nothing in federal law requires contiguity, and that might be right, but I'm not sure.
A few questions on the redistricting issue/cases. As I understand it, SCOTUS has stated that partisan gerrymandering is non justiciable at the federal court level:
1. Is it still justiciable at the state level? Or did Calais in some way remove state court review as well?
2. Since partisan gerrymandering is not reviewable at the federal level, through a partisan gerrymander could a state:
a. put people in no district at all?
b. create non-contiguous districts?
At least as a matter of state law, states can regulate partisan gerrymandering and state courts can enforce those regulations.
Both the one-person/one-vote doctrine and probably Article I, Section 2 would forbid putting people in no district at all.
I'm not so sure about non-contiguous districts. I've seen it asserted that nothing in federal law requires contiguity, and that might be right, but I'm not sure.