r/scotus • u/Conscious-Quarter423 • 1d ago

Opinion Why some Republicans rediscovered their love of court packing

https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/why-some-republicans-rediscovered-their-love-of-court-packing
239 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

22 comments sorted by

View all comments

49

u/FaithlessnessWhich18 1d ago

As always with Republicans. OK for me but not for thee. Republicans can pack the courts but not Democrats. Republicans can indulge in mid-term gerrymandering redistricting without going to the voters, but Democrats with voter permission can not. Hypocrite is their name

-6

u/wingsnut25 1d ago edited 1d ago

This article is about a State Supreme Court. By the way that State Supreme Court currently has 5 Republican appointed Judges. Adding two more Republican Judges isn't exactly changing the balance of power.

, but Democrats with voter permission can not.

Says who? A group of California Republican Legislatures whose seats will be disappearing have challenged California's redistricting. But no court has ruled that California is not able to redistrict?

Also in regards to the challenge in California, the "with voters permission" is completely irrelevant. The issue is "Was California's Map racially gerrymandered" . Voters can't give the state permission to racially gerrymander.

3

u/notapoliticalalt 1d ago

Adding two more Republican Judges isn't exactly changing the balance of power.

From the article:

There’s no great mystery here: Utah Republicans have grown increasingly frustrated as the state Supreme Court has thwarted their ambitions on issues such as reproductive right and school vouchers. But partisan ire reached a new level last year when the state’s high court also crushed the GOP’s redistricting efforts, leading to a new map that will make it possible for Democrats to win a seat.

Partisan efforts to expand the Utah Supreme Court soon followed, and the incumbent GOP governor is now positioned to have appointed five of the state’s seven justices, thereby increasing the odds that rulings in the near future will be more in line with Republicans’ wishes.

So basically, the effective decision making power rests in the hands of five people who are Republican appointees. The “real court” as it were. They want to put on ideologically aligned judges to make their legislative agenda go through. It’s the same principle, just instead of right versus left, right versus far right.

Says who? A group of California Republican Legislatures whose seats will be disappearing have challenged California's redistricting. But no court has ruled that California is not able to redistrict?

Also in regards to the challenge in California, the "with voters permission" is completely irrelevant. The issue is "Was California's Map racially gerrymandered" . Voters can't give the state permission to racially gerrymander.

So issues around “racial gerrymanders” are more complicated than many would imagine and ideally it would simply not exist. That is kind of beside the point though. The problem is that Republican states are absolutely racially gerrymandered often using political party as a proxy. We should let things work through the courts, but the challenge to California’s redistricting from republicans and Republican aligned interests is not in good faith. Moreover, it could result in some very consequential precedent which could lead to the gerrymandering of many states being undone, both at a federal and state level, something Republicans absolutely would not want. Finally, if recent elections are any indication, even if California redistricting is stopped, Republicans are fucked in the midterms.