What SCOTUS is about to rule on could change ELECTION RESULTS forever

An interesting case was just brought before the U.S. Supreme Court that could have massive ramifications for our electoral system. It centers around the definition of “one person, one vote.” The question is, exactly what does that mean? When districts are created, right now it’s based on population, but should that definition be refined?

Supreme_Court_US_2010

 


As Written By Allen B. West:

I was reading a recent piece by Drew Desilver of the Pew Research Center, which said, “This week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in a Texas case that challenges the way nearly every U.S. voting district – from school boards to Congress – is drawn.

The case asks the court to specify what the word “person” means in its “one person, one vote” rule. The outcome of the case could have major impacts on Hispanic voting strength and representation from coast to coast.

Ever since a series of landmark rulings in the 1960s, districts have been drawn “as nearly of equal population as is practicable.” (As Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote for the majority in Reynolds v. Sims, “Legislators represent people, not trees or acres. Legislators are elected by voters, not farms or cities or economic interests.”)

The high court didn’t directly say what “equal population” meant, but states and localities have almost invariably used total population figures. And that population is determined by the decennial census. However, the appellants in the Texas case, Evenwel v. Abbott, argue that districts instead should be drawn to have equal numbers of eligible voters. (The case involves redistricting within states, not reapportioning congressional seats among states.)

That’s a big distinction, because in many states, districts with nearly equal total populations can have dramatically different numbers of eligible voters (that is, U.S. citizens ages 18 and older).”

Let’s repeat that again. There is a huge differentiation between just plain population and the number of eligible voters. For example, there are areas where felony arrests mean someone can be part of the population, but will never be an eligible voter.

 

GET MORE STORIES LIKE THIS

IN YOUR INBOX!

Sign up for our daily email and get the stories everyone is talking about.

Leave a Comment

Comment via Facebook

Comment via Disqus

  • Elapoides

    Well, with the assistance & facilitation of the Establishment GOP, prepare to bend over America…This is exactly what you get when you vote for the lesser of two evils!
    I served my country for over 12 years in the US Military, swore to defend & protect the US Constitution, and if necessary give my life for this country? For what?
    Time for “We the People” to wake up, and take action before we are silenced by AMNESTY! The political demographics are about to change, is any of this sinking into your thick skulls?
    Many of you simply disgust me, and when all of Obama’s actions start breaking through that fantasy world of all you liberals and do nothings live in, you will finally understand what true suffering is, and experience poverty and the loss of your freedom. May I say, you so richly deserve what is coming.

    • J.French

      Well stated & unfortunately true.
      The worst of the Obama ramifications are contained within changing the structure of the Supreme Court which has repercussions far exceeding the Obama reign of power.
      This is the true struggle concerning a Hillary election into the voided throne. Such would enable Hillary to appoint definitely liberal Judges replacing Ruth Ginsburg & Steven Breyer who are both in line for retirement. This is especially critical given the flip-flop of Roberts.
      To make a response to your anticipation of potential poverty suffered by the liberal Sheeples & loss of associated freedoms, China which has quietly pursued purchase of a vast amount of the worlds available gold supply in an effort to back their currency, Yuan as a gold standard currency to replace the US dollar which has especially under Obama been used to manipulate markets printing dollars out of thin air to the tune of $4.6 Trillion over 7 years as World Reserve Currency meaning an instant predicted devaluation of the US dollar of 22% ending at 40% over a 1 year period which would destroy the US economy.

  • MmeMoxie

    Well, maybe the “one person, one vote” does need to be addressed. I understand this to mean – When we go to vote, I am only allowed one vote, not 2,3,4, or 100 times to vote – Just ONE vote!

    Now, I may be wrong, but, districting and re-districting are purely political means to establish how many people there are in a given area. It doesn’t matter, if, they are voters or not, they are still represented and should be. If, representation was only for allowed voters, meaning those who pass the criteria to be a US Citizen, with no felonies – This violates the purpose of the US Constitution, in my opinion.

    • flothow

      The one person, one vote should not include illegal aliens and non citizens. Nor should it include felons in prison whi have lost their voting rights and control over where they live.

      • MmeMoxie

        I guess, I didn’t make my statement clear enough. I did say – If, representation was only for allowed voters, meaning those who pass the criteria to be a US Citizen, with no felonies – This violates the purpose of the US Constitution, in my opinion.

        What I meant was – Elected officials must represent all in their district, not just those who are allowed to vote. BUT – US Citizens are the only ones who can vote, which means NO illegals voting, I fully agree with that, 100%!!!

        As for felonies, it really does depend upon, which state you live in. My state does not allow felons to vote, period. But, there are other states that do allow it, not when they are in prison though and there is criteria that must be followed, if, they want to vote. I don’t understand that, but, it is what it is.

  • Jim Siler

    It should be a citizens right to vote all noncitizens should not be allowed to vote that’s why we push for voter ID if we have that law all this nonsense goes away