And I say huzzah.
Gerrymandering — by any political party to achieve and sustain its staying in power — is anti-democratic and wrong. That’s true whichever party is doing it (though at present most challenges are against the GOP, who were most recently in a position to game the system after their 2010 midterm victories), and I am perfectly happy to see court decisions and legislation that block the practice by anyone, even the party I vote for most often.
If you can’t win without stacking the deck in your favor, then you don’t deserve to win. The fundamental principle of voting is that we all have a say in determining our elected representatives; when that principle is violated with no more reason than “We want our side to win,” it’s an attack on everyone.
North Carolina’s Novel Anti-Partisan-Gerrymander Ruling – The Atlantic
Judges said redistricting designed to elect Republicans violated the Constitution, the first time a federal court has come to that conclusion.
FINALLY … I heard that this was coming
+Danny McCullough Unfortunately, the really challenge is whether SCOTUS — which has two such cases before it — will agree with the reasoning.
+Dave Hill honestly … that's the reason for the GOP stalling Barak's SCOTUS nominations. So now we're back to the stall hustle on the 2018 turn out
Here's the challenge, however – what is a legally "fair" allocation of voting districts? Or is it like the definition of pornography – we'll know it when we see it?
+John E. Bredehoft To the extent that it can be rendered in a mathematical fashion (per the models described), it's a matter of setting a number. That's a bit arbitrary, perhaps, but better than a "gut feel."
In this particular case, since the state GOP explicitly stated that they were going to partisan gerrymand, it isn't that big of a challenge to say that's what they did, even if one doesn't look at the seriously out-of-what results.