Supremes to rule on TX redistricting

I've noticed that officials in Wshington, particularly those involved in enforcing the law, are finally starting to notice that activities at the very core of the Republican rise to power may actually be illegal. First it was revealed last week that, as part of the Jack Abramoff investigation, the Justice Department was bringing the K Street Project under some scrutiny. Now we learn that the Supreme Court is going to take up the Texas redistricting case.

The U.S. Supreme Court said on Monday that it would decide a challenge by Democrats and minority groups to the controversial 2003 Republican-supported congressional redistricting plan in Texas.

The justices agreed to review a ruling by a federal three-judge panel that upheld the bitterly contested map, which had been strongly supported by U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay of Texas.

Those challenging the redistricting plan argued it amounted to an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander by manipulating voting districts to give one party an unfair advantage and that it diluted the voting strength of minorities.

They said the plan shifted more than 8 million Texans into new districts and that it was designed in 2003 to protect all 15 Republican members of Congress and to defeat at least seven of the 17 Democratic members.

Remember, a key part of Tom DeLay's defense in his money laundering trial is that he was trying to re-establish a strong Republican majority in his home state. In other words, his alibi for wrongdoing was an act that may be unconstitutional in and of itself. I don't know if anyone holds out hope that the Supreme Court will decide this one without injecting a measure of partisanship along the lines of the Bush v. Gore decision (like that one, they'll probably issue a verdict that only covers this specific case and can never be used as a precedent again). However, it should be fun to see committed ideologues have to compromise their principles once again in arguing against equal protection, and against the Voting Rights Act.

Still, arguments won't be heard in this case until April, at which time it's likely Sandra Day O'Connor will no longer be around. How do you think ScAlito will see this case?

...by the way, career Justice Department officials saw major constitutional flaws in Texas' redistricting plan, only to be overruled by the higher-ups. Once that scandalous bit of news got out, the Bush Administration sought to eliminate such embarrassing incidents in the future. Not by listening to career Justice Department officials, mind you, but by banning staff opinions and recommendations in such cases.

Now THAT'S efficiency in government! Instead of allowing for time-consuming research, you know, actually looking up the laws and seeing if they are being violated, we'll just move on and decide these things by executive fiat! In fact, seeing as those Justice Department officials in the Voting Rights division won't be asked their opinions anymore, perhaps they could be persuaded to just go. Smaller government! See, the solution to a difference in opinion, rather than compromise, is not allowing a difference in opinion. That's the Bush way!