re: #285 lawhawk

[Embedded content]

I dunno (IANAL and all that), but I think there are a couple of under-reported aspects to the PA gerrymandering decision that may or may not be unmitigated “good news”. Of course, this dark-lining-to-the-cloud opinion is based mainly on reading Internet commentary, so there you go…

1. Did SCOTUS cite any particular reason for refusing a review/stay of the PASC decision? I’m guessing it might be because it’s solely a “State” matter (?)

2. One aspect of the PA case that is moderately disturbing is that (AFAICT) a good case CAN be made that this is a matter of some level of “judicial overreach”; i.e. a State SC telling the lege to take actions, under an interpretation of the State Constitution whose sole appeal would be to the Court that mandated the action in the first place. The Pennsylvania decision looks to be a “good thing” for election purposes, (at least IMO), but I’m wondering if we’d be cheering as much if the State SC in, say, Idaho or Mississippi, issued a decision reserving the power to adjudicate Congressional districts (or review thereof) to itself, where we KNOW Republicans would be favored? Justice does, after all, have two edges on her sword…..