SCOTUS Deals Major Blow to NC Dems in Partisan Gerrymandering Ruling

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Democrats in North Carolina have been fond of the ‘Sue ’til Blue’ strategy of challenging every other Republican in courts in the hopes that liberal judges will hand them political victories. In some cases it has worked (Voter ID), but Thursday the Supreme Court of the United States hands those Democrats a defeat in the case of their challenge of partisan gerrymandering as unconstitutional.

In a 5-4 vote on the North Carolina case, justices found that the “partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts.” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in his majority opinion that states and Congress could pass laws to prevent politically oriented districts, but asking the courts to do so would be “an unprecedented expansion of judicial power.”

Simply put, courts have no business in drawing legislative maps. Elections have consequences. Want to draw legislative maps? Win elections. Want to control policy? Win elections. Want to turn the state ‘Blue’? Win elections.

Trending: Illegal Alien, Underage Accomplice Charged with Mass Murder, Execution of Children in Alexander County

Dr. Michael Bitzer, a political science professor and historian at Catawba College, outlines the blows landed on the Left with this ruling.

The Left here in the Old North State has been fond of pointing out as ‘unfair’ that 10 of 13 congressional seats are held by Republicans despite receiving only a bit above 50 percent of the statewide vote. The Supreme Court rightly smacks that flawed premise down, pointing out that it this is a “norm that does not exist” and is in direct conflict with our first past the post electoral system. In other words, there is no constitutional justification for giving large populations in urban Mecklenburg County, for example, over the representation of those in, say, Johnston County strictly because the former represents a larger portion of the statewide vote.

Indeed, the court rejected the ‘one person, one vote’ argument made by Democrats in North Carolina, and scoffs at the equating of political gerrymandering to racial gerrymandering.

Of course, the liberal justices, such as Elena Kagan, thought both the North Carolina and Pennsylvania cases amounted to ‘rigging elections,’ but even if you accept that notion, it doesn’t mean the courts are the ones with jurisdiction to resolve the issue. You where that jurisdiction lies? The ballot box. Winning elections by making the case.

Let’s not forget that Republicans ‘made the case’ earlier this decade under maps drawn by Democrats, and won. Similarly, for all their whining about gerrymandered districts, in 2018 Democrats put a serious dent in the Republican majority on Jones Street.

Notably, the court was also dealing with the Pennsylvania case in which Democrats politically gerrymandered districts to their advantage, and the court reached the same conclusion – not unconstitutional, and not the judiciary’s role. Democrats in the Keystone State are likely pleased with the ruling. Democrats in the First in Freedom State; not so much.

But conservatives interested in constitutional government, and a judiciary that does not legislate (or draw maps) from the bench, aren’t the least bit upset that Pennsylvania Democrats were reinforced by the high court. That’s because conservatives understand that elections have consequences, and we must live with them, if only to bang the drum louder for voters during the next election.

So, North Carolina Democrats’ ‘Sue til’ Blue’ efforts have now been refuted by the highest court in the land. Now they’re just, well, blue.

Have a hot tip for First In Freedom Daily?

Got a hot news tip for us? Photos or video of a breaking story? Send your tips, photos and videos to tips@firstinfreedomdaily.com. All hot tips are immediately forwarded to FIFD Staff.

Have something to say? Send your own guest column or original reporting to submissions@firstinfreedomdaily.com.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.