All pain, whose gain? The surprising implications of a new legal theory for redistricting
(cross-posted with my new Substack) Lots of pixels have been spilled on a legal theory once considered fringe, the Independent State Legislatu...
Senate: 48 Dem | 52 Rep (range: 47-52)
Control: R+2.9% from toss-up
Generic polling: Tie 0.0%
Control: Tie 0.0%
Harris: 265 EV (239-292, R+0.3% from toss-up)
Moneyball states: President NV PA NC
Click any tracker for analytics and data
This summer, I’ll be on a panel at Netroots Nation to talk about state-level strategies to achieve fair districting. It will be in Philadelphia from July 11-13. Our panel’s on the first day.
The other panelists are great. They include a member of the California redistricting commission, widely considered to be a bipartisan success. The Princeton Gerrymandering Project is similarly nonpartisan. We are open to a wide variety of audiences and allies, including Netroots Nation, a progressive gathering.
So Sam, what do you make of the argument by Roberts et al that Federal Courts are essentially incapable of ascertaining a fact basis and appropriate standards to curb abusive exercises of political power via gerrymandering?