The high court didn’t rule, nor did it say when it would, but as the justices ponder what to do with the challenged — and unapproved — redistricting maps, the clock continues to tick. And the more time that passes, the higher the likelihood that Texas voters will not be going to the polls to vote in primaries now scheduled for April 3.
The court brought up discussions about a primary vote as late as June. The primaries were originally scheduled for March 6.
In an effort to resolve Texas’ months-long redistricting battle, the Supreme Court heard arguments from an attorney for the state as well as from a lawyer representing a group of plaintiffs suing Texas. The plaintiffs are challenging the state in a federal court in San Antonio, claiming the maps for Congress and the state House and state Senate drawn by the Legislature earlier this year dilute the votes of minority Texans.
Although the San Antonio court held a trial on the Legislature’s maps, it has not ruled on them. But because the Legislature’s maps have not received federal pre-clearance required under the U.S. Voting Rights Act, the panel drew its own maps for use during this year’s fast-approaching elections. Read full story here>>>>
I have now had a chance to read through the transcript of today’s argument in the Texas redistricting cases. Here are some observations (pardon me for some of the voting rights shorthand in this piece).
1. Everything below is with a big caveat that the case is very complex and the Justices had to digest everything on a fairly short timeframe, and so views are more likely to change after argument than normal. full article here>>>>
follow us on facebook