February 11, 2009 6:19 PM
- Text
Court: States Can Redraw Political Map
(CBS/AP)
The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld most of the Republican-boosting Texas congressional map engineered by former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay but threw out part, saying some of the new boundaries failed to protect minority voting rights.
The fractured decision was a small victory for Democratic and minority groups who accused Republicans of an unconstitutional power grab in drawing boundaries that booted four Democratic incumbents from office.
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority, said Hispanics do not have a chance to elect a candidate of their choosing under the plan. The vote was 5-4 on that issue.
Republicans picked up six Texas congressional seats two years ago, and the court's ruling does not seriously threaten those gains. Lawmakers, however, will have to adjust boundary lines to address the court's concerns.
On a different matter, the court ruled 7-2 that state legislators may draw new maps as often as they like, not just once a decade as Texas Democrats claimed. That means Democratic and Republican state lawmakers can push through new maps anytime there is a power shift at a state capital.
The Constitution says states must adjust their congressional district lines every 10 years to account for population shifts. In Texas the boundaries were redrawn twice after the 2000 census, first by a court, then by state lawmakers in a second round promoted by DeLay after Republicans took control.
That was acceptable, the justices said.
"We reject the statewide challenge to Texas redistricting as an unconstitutional political gerrymander," Kennedy wrote.
However, he said the state's redrawing of District 23 violated the Voting Rights Act.
"You can say the Democrats won because any help on political matters from this conservative court has to be considered a surprise. Or you can say the Republicans won because the vast majority of the plan was upheld and certainly the Justices have signaled that similar plans in the future also are likely to be okay," CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen said.
The fractured decision was a small victory for Democratic and minority groups who accused Republicans of an unconstitutional power grab in drawing boundaries that booted four Democratic incumbents from office.
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority, said Hispanics do not have a chance to elect a candidate of their choosing under the plan. The vote was 5-4 on that issue.
Republicans picked up six Texas congressional seats two years ago, and the court's ruling does not seriously threaten those gains. Lawmakers, however, will have to adjust boundary lines to address the court's concerns.
At issue was the shifting of 100,000 Hispanics out of a district represented by a Republican incumbent and into a new, oddly shaped district. Foes of the plan had argued that that was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander under the Voting Rights Act, which protects minority voting rights.Supreme Court Redistricting Ruling
On a different matter, the court ruled 7-2 that state legislators may draw new maps as often as they like, not just once a decade as Texas Democrats claimed. That means Democratic and Republican state lawmakers can push through new maps anytime there is a power shift at a state capital.
The Constitution says states must adjust their congressional district lines every 10 years to account for population shifts. In Texas the boundaries were redrawn twice after the 2000 census, first by a court, then by state lawmakers in a second round promoted by DeLay after Republicans took control.
That was acceptable, the justices said.
"We reject the statewide challenge to Texas redistricting as an unconstitutional political gerrymander," Kennedy wrote.
However, he said the state's redrawing of District 23 violated the Voting Rights Act.
"You can say the Democrats won because any help on political matters from this conservative court has to be considered a surprise. Or you can say the Republicans won because the vast majority of the plan was upheld and certainly the Justices have signaled that similar plans in the future also are likely to be okay," CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen said.
- 1
- 2
- Next Page »
Popular Now in CBSNews.com
- Teens Are Wired ... And, Yes, It's OK
- Cell Phones: Evolution Or Revolution?
- The Digital Divide 2.0
- How Many Americans Died In Korea?
- Six tons of marijuana seized in Chicago
- Death Penalty Mistakes The Rule
- Supreme Court Shoots Down D.C. Gun Ban
- Getting The Best Car Rental Rates
- Remains Hold Hope For Closure
- Colorado Kills Gun Laws
- Backpacks Too Heavy?
- Stripe Your Lawn Like A Pro
- Covering The Civil Rights Movement
- CBS Reports: Marijuana
- High Court Refuses Redskins Name Complaint
- Cannabis Tour Guide On Amsterdam
- Supreme Court Revisits Second Amendment
Latest CBS News Headlines
on Facebook
on CBS News
- McCain: US must act to help Syrians under siege
- APNewsBreak: GOP report questions detainee release
- APNewsBreak: GOP report questions detainee release
- APNewsBreak: GOP report questions detainee release
on Facebook
- Adele sings a cappella for Anderson Cooper
- Josh Powell had "incestuous" images on his home computer, authorities say
on CBS News






