Democrats are demanding they have a right to win, and are asking the courts to enter the political realm and find, for the first time, that a legislative map is unconstitutional on partisan-related grounds. Basically, they are crying and complaining that it is “unfair” that a state which historically elected Democrats is suddenly voting for Republicans.
Does the Democratic Party have a constitutional right to win a minimum number of elections?
Of course not, but that’s what lawyers for a group of Wisconsin Democrats effectively argued at the Supreme Court in Gill v. Whitford.
Despite decades of experience and legal precedent to the contrary, Democrats are asking the Court to enter the political realm and find for the first time that a legislative map is unconstitutional on partisan-related grounds.
In other words, for the first time, the Supreme Court is being asked to throw out district boundaries not based on breaking the law, but that they were drawn in such a way to give one political party an advantage over another.
This has been a long-time battle. Back in the 1990’s Democrats drew North Carolina’s congressional districts following unpopulated freeways so they could create districts that gave them 9 of 12 seats.
But at that time, the challenge was “Did the law violate the National Voting Rights Act?”
This time it is strictly “Will the court say one political party can have too much of an advantage?”
Read the full article here, and let us know what you think…is this just another bit of whiny propaganda from the left, or is there something more to it?