Would the Supreme Court have accepted the case merely to rule
the Texas redistricting plan constitutional?
1) The Supreme Court rules
the Texas redistricting plan unconstitutional: Previous lines are restored and (depending on if they are used for the 2006 elections) Democrats gain six seats in the House and Republicans lose 6.
Not exact matches
[T] he
redistricting plan illegally diluted black and Hispanic voting power in two congressional districts... The State of
Texas has not met its burden in showing that the proposed congressional
redistricting plan does not have a discriminatory effect.
The State of
Texas obtained pre-clearance from the US Department of Justice for its 2003 Congressional
redistricting plan.
But in December 2005, The Washington Post reported, «Justice Department lawyers concluded that the landmark
Texas congressional
redistricting plan spearheaded by Rep. Tom DeLay violated the Voting Rights Act, according to a previously undisclosed memo,» uncovered by the newspaper.
The 2003
Texas redistricting refers to a controversial mid-decade state
plan that defined new Congressional districts.
Following the major trend of
Texas's 2011
redistricting cycle, Democrats immediately railed against the Republican
plan for not giving enough representation to minorities, even going as far as calling the map illegal.
Rep. Chet Edwards, the only Democrat targeted by
Texas Republicans in their 2003
redistricting plan to win in November 2004, has spent most of his time raising campaign cash.
Prosecutors said that the money helped the GOP win control of the
Texas House and that the majority then pushed through a DeLay - organized congressional
redistricting plan that sent more Republicans to Congress.
Democratic legislators in
Texas employed a similar tactic in 2003 to try to stop a controversial
redistricting plan that gave Republicans more seats in Congress.
The Supreme Court issued three opinions today, upholding a Republican - engineered Congressional
redistricting plan in
Texas (League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry), upholding a Pennsylvania ban on newspapers and magazines for prison inmates (Beard v. Banks) and ruling that states may bar foreign nationals from raising treaty rights not raised at trial (Sanchez - Llamas v. Oregon).