Fighting Gerrymandering in the home of Gerry
A panel of Federal judges have ruled that the Massachusetts legislature must redraw the tortuous and insane boundaries of certain Boston-area voting districts.
A panel of federal judges ordered Massachusetts House leaders yesterday to redraw the Boston legislative map, determining that the plan crafted by House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran and his lieutenants was designed to protect their own political futures at the expense of black voters' constitutional rights. . . .During the trial last fall, Finneran, a Mattapan Democrat, insisted that the redistricting plan did not unfairly divide minority neighborhoods, but he conceded that his aides tried to ensure that sitting representatives were not harmed by shifting demographics revealed by a new census.
When the lines were redrawn, [House leader Tom] Finneran's district shed three overwhelmingly minority neighborhoods and took on three that were at least 95 percent white, including areas of Milton. Even as Boston for the first time emerged as a "majority-minority" city in the 2000 federal census, Finneran's district went from 74 percent minority to 61 percent minority.
"The House was comfortable with manipulating district lines," the court ruled. "This sad fact speaks to the totality of the circumstances."
More of this, please!
on
| § 5
§ 5 Comments
[ You're too late, comments are closed ]
George Bush would call these
George Bush would call these guys "activist judges".
Don't be so sure.
Don't be so sure.
"Activist judge" is code for
"Activist judge" is code for "judge who made decision I didn't agree with".
For some, true. But there is
For some, true. But there is no evidence that Republicans, or George Bush would have disagreed with this ruling, seeing as it goes against Democratic attempts to legislate themselves into permanent congressman. You need to take off whatever funky glasses you're wearing that make everything appear to be a Karl Rove orchestrated Satanic Bush plot.
There are those, and I am one, who believe that there is such a thing as judicial activism, and that it is bad. I believe it is bad even when it results in a tactical disadvantage for some other principle I might hold. The job of the courts is not to usurp the legislative power in our government. It is a profoundly negative power - not a positive one.
Striking down this ridiculous, tortured effort to deny effective voting rights is okay, whether the beneficiary is D or R.
See all the hassle this whole
See all the hassle this whole elected legislature is getting us in MA?
If the SJC would only rule that the legislature itself is racist, or something, and thereby unconstitutional, it could have the whole body disbanded.
The court itself could then simply rule by fiat in perpetuity, and not have to deal with any of these troublesome issues anymore.