Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I have now read the opinion and I'm no lawyer, but to me that appears to be a quite sound and thorough bit of legal analysis.Here's a pretty good summary of Judge Brown's career. I appeared before him back when he was a State District Court judge here in Houston. And our firm always liked seeing him on an appellate panel when he was on the 14th Court of Appeals in Houston.
I think I heard or read somewhere that a +8 gain for the Dems compared to 2024 would put several of those gerrymandered districts at serious risk of flipping. +8 seems very doable right now, especially in a place like Texas given the ~40 point swing among Latinos.I have now read the opinion and I'm no lawyer, but to me that appears to be a quite sound and thorough bit of legal analysis.
I read it as saying "The Supreme court has spent years trying to undermine the VRA by claiming race based districting is unconstitutional, and now that's the law of the land, and this is a clear-as-day case of race based redistricting, so we gotta pull the plug on this."
And regardless of all that, I think the republicans are dodging a bullet here. Creating 4 or 5 new Hispanic majority districts might have sounded like a good idea at the time, but Trump'd favorability among Hispanics has plunged a full 40 points since February. Somebody would have to run the numbers, but I'm not convinced the 2025 maps provide a better outcome for Republicans than the 2021 ones do in light of that fact.
There is no bullet dodging. The Supreme Court will stay this injunction and the new Texas maps will be used.I have now read the opinion and I'm no lawyer, but to me that appears to be a quite sound and thorough bit of legal analysis.
I read it as saying "The Supreme court has spent years trying to undermine the VRA by claiming race based districting is unconstitutional, and now that's the law of the land, and this is a clear-as-day case of race based redistricting, so we gotta pull the plug on this."
And regardless of all that, I think the republicans are dodging a bullet here. Creating 4 or 5 new Hispanic majority districts might have sounded like a good idea at the time, but Trump'd favorability among Hispanics has plunged a full 40 points since February. Somebody would have to run the numbers, but I'm not convinced the 2025 maps provide a better outcome for Republicans than the 2021 ones do in light of that fact.
I was fully expecting the TX plan to backfire, at least in part. Spreading mean margins of victory more thinly is not likely a winning hand under the current circumstances.And regardless of all that, I think the republicans are dodging a bullet here. Creating 4 or 5 new Hispanic majority districts might have sounded like a good idea at the time, but Trump'd favorability among Hispanics has plunged a full 40 points since February. Somebody would have to run the numbers, but I'm not convinced the 2025 maps provide a better outcome for Republicans than the 2021 ones do in light of that fact.
We can still have hopeI was fully expecting the TX plan to backfire, at least in part. Spreading mean margins of victory more thinly is not likely a winning hand under the current circumstances.
That's what I used to think. But then I looked at the numbers and I'm not sure dummymanders really exist? At worst, the gerrymander might fail, in that the created districts will actually be competitive, but I don't think gerrymandering carries much risk of actually backfiring. That's what computer technology and micro-grainy data can do. I mean, I didn't do an exhaustive study or anything, but I'm less convinced that gerrymanders are unstable.I think I heard or read somewhere that a +8 gain for the Dems compared to 2024 would put several of those gerrymandered districts at serious risk of flipping. +8 seems very doable right now, especially in a place like Texas given the ~40 point swing among Latinos.
Stay classless, Benito Cheeto.![]()
Trump dismisses Marjorie Taylor Greene’s claim his attacks put her in danger, tells female reporter ‘quiet, quiet piggy’
U.S. President Donald Trump doubled down on his attacks against Republican lawmaker Marjorie Taylor Greene on Sunday, dismissing her claim that his criticism was endangering her and saying he did not believe anyone was targeting her.www.ctvnews.ca
Trump dismisses Marjorie Taylor Greene’s claim his attacks put her in danger, tells female reporter ‘quiet, quiet piggy’
Issuing a stay here would involve apocalyptical levels of hypocrisy. Plus, to me that opinion read like a 160 page buttoning up of arguments to prevent that sort of thing.There is no bullet dodging. The Supreme Court will stay this injunction and the new Texas maps will be used.
I’ll take a bet on it. Any amount up to $1000.Issuing a stay here would involve apocalyptical levels of hypocrisy. Plus, to me that opinion read like a 160 page buttoning up of arguments to prevent that sort of thing.
I'm sure not putting it past the Supreme Court to do anything, but frankly I'd be surprised.
And these assholes wonder why the alt right feels empowered to be overtly antisemitic.![]()
Texas Governor Declares Muslim Civil Rights Group a ‘Terrorist Organization’
Gov. Greg Abbott said the state could now take steps to shut down the Council on American-Islamic Relations. The group said the declaration had no basis in fact or law.www.nytimes.com
Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas declared on Tuesday that one of the nation’s largest Muslim advocacy and civil rights groups is a foreign terrorist organization, saying the move will prohibit the organization from acquiring land in Texas and authorize the state attorney general “to sue to shut them down” in Texas.
In his declaration, Mr. Abbott said that the group, the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations, had direct ties to Hamas, which has been designated as a terrorist group by the U.S. government. The nonprofit, known by its initials, CAIR, has denied having any such ties.
The governor also suggested, without offering evidence, that CAIR’s leadership sought to impose Islamic law, known as Shariah, on Americans.
Well, recent history does suggest that betting that this Supreme Court will chose the right side of history on anything is a losing proportion. I'll give you that.I’ll take a bet on it. Any amount up to $1000.