to the editor: Contributor Erwin Chemerinsky's recent op-ed should be required reading for all who support our constitutional democracy (“The Supreme Court's 3 terrible reasons for allowing the racially gerrymandered map of Texas” December 5).
There is a lot wrong with the Supreme Court's blocking of the lower court's reasoned opinion that ruled the Texas redistricting map unconstitutional. As Chemerinsky points out, the three reasons given by the Supreme Court in its unsigned opinion are blatant sophistry and result in making it impossible for anyone to challenge a legislature's action in redistricting at any time before a midterm legislative election.
What's more, this decision comes from the court's “shadow docket,” meaning it is handed down without information or oral argument, but it still gives the green light to the disputed redistricting map for the upcoming election.
The reason why a map drawn up for purely partisan political purposes can be constitutionally permissible is surprising. In 2019, in rucho vyes. common causeChief Justice John Roberts (in defending a redistricting map) wrote: “Excessive partisanship in redistricting leads to results that reasonably appear unfair. But the fact that such gerrymandering is 'incompatible with democratic principles' does not mean that the solution lies in the hands of the federal judiciary.” But this is where we are.
James Stiven, Cardiff
This author is a retired US judge.
..
to the editor: Chemerinsky is outraged that Texas is being allowed to redraw its congressional maps, which are designed to elect five more Republicans to the House of Representatives. Would it be appropriate to prohibit Texas from doing this after California has already found legal avenues to do something similar? I'm not sure how all states can be forced to draw districts that are reasonable and fair, but Chemerinsky seems to bemoan the practice of gerrymandering in Texas without mentioning complaints when it happens in California.
David Waldowski, Laguna Woods
..
to the editor: Although Chemerinsky accurately describes the Supreme Court's stated reasons for the decision, the actual justification was probably much more cynical.
First, Texas racially gerrymandered its congressional district maps to favor Trump in the midterm elections. Second, California rigged its own maps in response, but did better by putting them to a statewide vote. Finally, the Texas stunt was challenged in court on strong constitutional grounds and looked like it might lose, so it could all backfire on our man, President Trump. And well, we can't allow that, right?
Ronald Ellsworth, The Table
