|
Court Approves Texas Redistricting Plan
Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Okay. It just strikes me that a "save the integrity of the system" argument that values process over result is what you (and I) use when we don't like the result.
|
Are you being obtuse, or do you have some other way of explaining away the fact that Republicans in Texas and Colorado were redistricting in the middle of the decade, as has not been done? When RT talks about the integrity of the system, I hear her as saying that redistricting is necessary but divisive and costly, and it therefore makes sense to observe the norm that it happen once every 10 years, after the census. Obviously there's no law against it.
edited to say:
I didn't give enough credit to your observation about process vs. result, but I can't believe that a lawyer would not entertain arguments about process as legitimate. There are such obvious reasons to avoid fights about process in contentious proceedings like, e.g., redistricting.
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
|
