5 Comments
User's avatar
Michael Feinberg's avatar

The Court is either statistically naive or it is duplicitous. I vote for duplicitous.

Morgan's avatar

Viewed neutrally, it is a simple stat error. But it's more likely that the decision of people like Alito (and certainly Roberts) happened first and then he (they) came up with plausible-sounding rationalizations for it.

LiverpoolFCfan's avatar

Thank you for this exquisite clarification, Mr. Morris.

Doing my best to share it across my feeds.

Education is critical to communicate a sense of urgency, thus eliciting the tsunami of voters we're going to need this fall.

Bowman Cutter's avatar

Thus confirms what I’ve long known about the court. We should all be clear: these are not,stupid people, they did,this on purpose

Ben's avatar

The Court has been clear that it believes the states get to do whatever they want to determine their Congresspeople. I disagree but so be it. Gerrymandering sucks regardless of whether it is about partisanship or race. My neighborhood is an appendage to a Congressional district that resulted from a gerrymander to create a majority-minority district (seat held by Pressley which surrounds me but doesn't include me). In fact if Greater Boston were un-gerrymandered there would likely be more minority representation in Congress with no impact on D vs R.