skip to main content
Guest
My Research
My Account
Sign out
Sign in
This feature requires javascript
Library Search
Find Databases
Browse Search
E-Journals A-Z
E-Books A-Z
Citation Linker
Help
Language:
English
Vietnamese
This feature required javascript
This feature requires javascript
Primo Search
All Library Resources
All
Course Materials
Course Materials
Search For:
Clear Search Box
Search in:
All Library Resources
Or hit Enter to replace search target
Or select another collection:
Search in:
All Library Resources
Search in:
Print Resources
Search in:
Digital Resources
Search in:
Online E-Resources
Advanced Search
Browse Search
This feature requires javascript
Search Limited to:
Search Limited to:
Resource type
criteria input
All items
Books
Articles
Images
Audio Visual
Maps
Graduate theses
Show Results with:
criteria input
that contain my query words
with my exact phrase
starts with
Show Results with:
Search type Index
criteria input
anywhere in the record
in the title
as author/creator
in subject
Full Text
ISBN
ISSN
TOC
Keyword
Field
Show Results with:
in the title
Show Results with:
anywhere in the record
in the title
as author/creator
in subject
Full Text
ISBN
ISSN
TOC
Keyword
Field
This feature requires javascript
A Turn to Process: Partisan Gerrymandering Post-Rucho
New York University law review (1950), 2023-12, Vol.98 (6), p.1
[Peer Reviewed Journal]
Copyright New York University Law Publications Dec 2023 ;ISSN: 0028-7881 ;EISSN: 2766-0834
Full text available
Citations
Cited by
View Online
Details
Recommendations
Reviews
Times Cited
External Links
This feature requires javascript
Actions
Add to My Research
Remove from My Research
E-mail
Print
Permalink
Citation
EasyBib
EndNote
RefWorks
Delicious
Export RIS
Export BibTeX
This feature requires javascript
Title:
A Turn to Process: Partisan Gerrymandering Post-Rucho
Author:
Kirschenbaum, Deven
Subjects:
Claims
;
Democracy
;
Election districts
;
Elections
;
Federal courts
;
Legislatures
;
Partisanship
;
Redistricting
;
Sovereignty
;
Supreme Court decisions
;
Supreme courts
;
Time
;
Tribunals & commissions
Is Part Of:
New York University law review (1950), 2023-12, Vol.98 (6), p.1
Description:
For nearly sixty years, litigants have challenged congressional and state redistricting maps, raising claims of partisan gerrymandering. Each time, the Supreme Court would hear and reject the challenge but continued to entertain the possibility that a claim of partisan gerrymandering could succeed. Then, in 2019, the Court in Rucho v. Common Cause took the dramatic step of holding that claims of partisan gerrymandering were nonjusticiable political questions. This both walked federal courts out of the picture and signaled the Court's tacit approval of gerrymandering. The decision came down at a time when gerrymandering was at an all-time high-in 2020, only 7.5% of the seats in the House of Representatives were "competitive." Now, despite clear attempts by lawmakers to subvert democracy through partisan gerrymandering, federal courts can no longer police district maps for partisan imbalance. Though some states have created independent redistricting commissions to draw district maps, these commissions are neither common enough nor strong enough to withstand political tendencies to gerrymander. Time and time again, litigants and scholars have searched for (and failed to find) a substantive standard by which partisan gerrymandering claims might succeed. This Note offers a new approach, grounded in classic legal principles: process instead of substance. Identifying both normative reasons for why process can better protect against partisan gerrymandering and highlighting instances in certain states where bolstering and, crucially, enforcing the processes by which district maps are drawn has helped mitigate gerrymandering, this Note argues that states (and litigants) should turn to process-based arguments to counter gerrymandered maps. Through process, states can strengthen their redistricting procedures and commissions, allowing for the creation of more balanced, competitive maps. Democracy hinges on competitive elections, and we need solutions to the problem of partisan gerrymandering; this Note offers a new framing of the problem and a path forward.
Publisher:
New York: New York University Law Publications
Language:
English
Identifier:
ISSN: 0028-7881
EISSN: 2766-0834
Source:
Free E Journals
This feature requires javascript
This feature requires javascript
Back to results list
This feature requires javascript
This feature requires javascript
Searching Remote Databases, Please Wait
Searching for
in
scope:(TDTS),scope:(SFX),scope:(TDT),scope:(SEN),primo_central_multiple_fe
Show me what you have so far
This feature requires javascript
This feature requires javascript