Breaking: Colorado SC rules redistricting unconstitutional

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Redistricting-Lawsuit.html


Court Says Redistricting Unconstitutional
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Published: December 1, 2003


Filed at 9:45 a.m. ET

Advertisement


DENVER (AP) -- The Colorado Supreme Court ruled new congressional districts drawn by Republicans unconstitutional Monday, saying the Legislature can only take up redistricting after each census and before the ensuing general election.

The decision could have national implications in the 2004 congressional races.

Rick Perry is a piece of sh!t.

that should clear up the little power grab the rethugs are making in TX...:grr:

:bounce:

in this lazy libertarian-repug state.

Tip o' the hat to the Supremes!

Here and I thought there was no sence of legality in republican states. How wrong I was.

Take THAT you slimy fascist bastages!

It looks to me like they make it up as they go along, then their lawyers take out their shovels and justify whatever they do "legally."

do - such as.. that court in texas... even conservative judges tend to follow precedent.

They will take this to the US Supreme Court, which I;m sure they believe they have in their pocket.

but some recent rulings suggest otherwise.

Look instead for them to pull other shennanegans. Especially DeLay. But the court angle - even stacking courts (as they have been doing for years) does not ALWAYS protect them. Espeically when they do the self-righteous... we do it because we CAN and we are ALWAYS RIGHT thing - and flaunt all legality and court precedent. Why? Because they are more likely to actually be counter to the law. This does not mean that these courts will not generally rule with a conservative view, they will and they do. But aside from the most egregeious ruling (of which 2 who voted in the majority have expressed regrets for politicizing the court and permanently damaging its reputation), there is a small bit of growing independence.

Expect regrouping and new (and if possible, uglier) tactics from DeLay et al.

Ugly is as ugly does.

After the Bush v Gore fiasco, the USSC is very *CAREFUL* nowadays to touch state matters, and the USSC will uphold the CSSC's decision.

Hawkeye-X

arbitration. Why TX would rule in favor of the Repubs after this, though, is...well, it would be because DeLay owns them, too.

wh..wh...whoopie! Long time, no whoopie :party:

Go us.

What will the Rethugs accuse the Colorado SC of:
1. Legislating
2. Poor understanding of the Constitution
3. Standing in the way of Republican dominance (a partison decision)

'Legislating from the Bench' attack. Its like the only play in their playbook!

Score one for our side. It's about time. :)

That would make a difference of about 7 seats possibly...

Bugman loses in Texas in one swell foop!

:holds up can of raid:

. . .would be this is take to a federal appeals court who either upholds the ruling or refuses to hear the case on a states rights basis. Then there would be a precedent that could impact Texas. . .any lawyers care to comment. I am just a jailhouse (DU) lawyer.

This should lift the spirits on this board today.:party:

receives this lawsuit, it would rule it unconstitutional, because our state and federal laws were clear. Now it's a true precedent that Texas Supreme Court will have no choice but to follow. The laws are clear - the gerrymandering can only happen once a decade, not twice, three times, or four times. So suck it up, Repubes, and prepare for the massive defeats in 2004, including 3rd and 7th districts which will become Democratic for years to come. I even wrote my opinion back in DU on July stating so.

John Salazar is challenging the 3rd district that McInnis is retiring from. It has changed AGAIN now the CSSC has rendered the Repuke redistricting moot, it may be a tougher challenge, but with the popularity of John's brother, Ken Salazar, I see no problems for John to pick up the seat. Ken Salazar will be kicking Owens out from the governor's mansion in 2006. Guaranteed, and he has several victories challenging the state because of its utter stupidity, including the redistricting challenge.

Now, the 7th district is back in its original shape, it endangers Beauprez very heavily to be the first freshman Congressperson in decades to lose his seat to Mike Feeney -- and with the angry voters who have been lied to by Beauprez - expect a stunning defeat this time. No handcounting is necessary.

I also see a new challenge to Tancredo the Xenophobe's 6th. I don't know but Tancredo has many upset constitutants that is ready to throw him out.

Hawkeye-X

And of course the 7th is as well.

It keeps Costilla, Las Animas, Huerferno, and other key southern Colardo counties all in the same district.

having to endure chimpy being here at ft carson last week. gives one hope that we can finally get rid of some of these people- (now, if only there were a way to get rid of fungus on the family, and all the other little fundie rw tax-exempt political opportunists here in the springs)

In two original proceedings, consolidated for opinion, the Supreme Court holds:
(1) The Attorney General may bring an original proceeding pursuant to C.A.R. 21 to challenge the constitutionality of Senate Bill 03-352, a congressional redistricting law enacted by the General Assembly to replace the court-ordered congressional districts applied in the 2002 general election.
(2) Senate Bill 03-352 is unconstitutional because the Colorado Constitution requires the General Assembly to redistrict after each census and before the ensuing general election, and does not allow redistricting at any other time. Because the General Assembly failed to redistrict during this constitutional window, it relinquished its authority to redistrict until after the 2010 census.

http://www.courts.state.co.us/supct/opinions/2003/03SA13303SA147.doc

:bounce: :party: :bounce: :party: :bounce: