Supreme Court To Hear Challenge To ‘One Person, One Vote’
WASHINGTON — In a Texas case challenging the traditional view of “one person, one vote,” the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Tuesday on the way states and localities draw district lines. In Evenwel v. Abbott, the plaintiffs want Texas to count only voters or citizens eligible to vote in determining state Senate lines instead of…
13 responses to Supreme Court To Hear Challenge To ‘One Person, One Vote’
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
rg9rts December 8th, 2015 at 09:52
LOL…A new gopee end run on the voter…please tell me how much they want to be inclusive
CandideThirtythree December 8th, 2015 at 10:21
It does not matter if people are registered to vote or not, a politician has to swear to represent ALL of the people in his district.
DownriverDem December 8th, 2015 at 14:20
Except they only represent the rich.
CandideThirtythree December 8th, 2015 at 18:01
This is true
StoneyCurtisll December 8th, 2015 at 20:38
Exactly.
Warman1138 December 8th, 2015 at 10:27
Another attack on equality and democracy by those that deem themselves ” true Americans. ” It never seems to end, the conservative effort to gather political power in their hands and their hands only
fahvel December 8th, 2015 at 12:58
in your presidential election there is no one person one vote – you have this bizarre electoral college which makes no sense at all.
Scopedog December 8th, 2015 at 12:59
Jesus H. Christ. In 2015, the GOP want to take us back to the 18th century when it comes to voting….
….and yet I still read nonsense in comments (or at Salon) that are telling liberals not to vote to make sure the Democrats learn a lesson (whatever the f@#! that means). Of course, when voting rights are taken away from minorities I guess those idiots will get their wish, because no one will be able to vote.
I need a drink….
allison1050 December 8th, 2015 at 13:09
Make that 2 drinks.
DownriverDem December 8th, 2015 at 14:19
The repubs know that the voters would never vote for them if they knew what they planned on doing. Just go and ask folks living in Michigan. We are so screwed. The repubs here want to take away straight ticket voting. I don’t get it. It will make for longer lines at the polls. Also many repubs vote straight ticket. If you don’t have straight ticket voting where you live, is it a good thing?
amersham46 December 8th, 2015 at 18:53
This is the way they get things done in Texas
Glen December 8th, 2015 at 23:01
I can see the argument being put forward by the plaintiffs. It’s certainly a less clear-cut case than most of the SCOTUS cases that get media attention. But I suspect I’d fall on the side of “population makes more sense”. I suspect that this could be one of those rare cases where SCOTUS doesn’t split on left/right basis, but differently.
On the right, the argument in favour is “we shouldn’t be considering non-citizens when it comes to our electoral system”. On the left, it’s “voters should, in principle, have votes of equal weighting”. But both sides should favour the argument against. So if these arguments sway opinions, I could see, for instance, two on the right (probably Scalia and Thomas) and one on the left both writing dissenting opinions.
Personally, I’m more willing to accept the argument that non-citizens shouldn’t count than that non-eligible-voters shouldn’t count, because the latter suggests that those who aren’t considered suitable for voting also shouldn’t have a voice at all. In other words, children, who are the most important part of a society, would lose what little influence they have on the system.
maggie December 8th, 2015 at 23:57
in other words the white supremacists want legislation without representation for those who are not white or not male…what else is new? JUST SAY NO TO LEGISLATION W/O REPRESENTATION….;)