OH, How Magnificent! Prison Art Resources

Saturday, February 2, 2013

Bill of Rights Institute: Elbridge Gerry Gerrymandering illegal as Unconstitutional

Gerrymandering DISCUSSIONS

In the process of setting electoral districts, gerrymandering is a practice that attempts to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating district boundaries to create partisan advantaged districts. The resulting district is known as a gerrymander (/ˈɡɛrimændər/, alt. /ˈɛriˌmændər/); however, that word can also refer to the process. When used to allege that a given party is gaining disproportionate power, the term gerrymandering has negative connotations.
In addition to its use achieving desired electoral results for a particular party, gerrymandering may be used to help or hinder a particular demographic, such as a political, ethnic, racial, linguistic, religious, or class group, such as in U.S. federal voting district boundaries that produce a majority of constituents representative of African-American or other racial minorities, known as "majority-minority districts".

Prison-based gerrymandering

Gerrymandering 101

How do Republicans manage to Gerrymander your votes when it's un Constitutional.  While they plead to continue mass murdering hiding behind the second amendment.

Prison-based gerrymandering

Prison-based gerrymandering occurs when prisoners are counted as residents of a particular district, increasing the district's population with non-voters when assigning political apportionment. This phenomenon violates the principle of one person, one vote because, although many prisoners come from (and return to) urban communities, they are counted as "residents" of the rural districts that contain large prisons, thereby artificially inflating the political representation in districts with prisons at the expense of voters in all other districts without prisons.[15] Others contend that prisoners should not be counted as residents of their original districts when they do not reside there and arenot legally eligible to vote.

Census Bureau Contributes to Prison-based Gerrymandering

When Brooklyn native Ramon Velasquez was sentenced to prison, he was transported to the Attica Correctional Facility, about six hours and 350 miles from his home. Although acutely aware that he was far from where he lived, Velasquez did not realize that his transfer to Attica would also result in his community’s political clout being displaced. That’s because the U.S. Census Bureau—contrary to the provision of the New York State Constitution, which considers Velasquez a resident of Brooklyn even during his time in prison—counted him (and all other incarcerated persons in the United States) at the location of the prison rather than at his home.

Velasquez assumed that he would be counted in his home district during his prison sentence. After all, he had no connection to the local community in the district in which he was imprisoned. Incarcerated people  are not allowed to use local services and do not participate in local community affairs in any meaningful way. If allowed to vote, they are required to cast absentee ballots in their home districts. As Velasquez wrote in the Huffington Post, “I always considered Brooklyn my home, which is where my family lives.” And that’s where he returned directly upon his release.

Bill of Rights Institute: Elbridge Gerry:illegal as

 UnconstitutionalKarcher v. Daggett, 462 U.S. 725 (1983), was a United States

 Supreme Court case involving the legality of

 redistricting, and possibly gerrymandering, in the state 

of New Jersey.[1][2][3]Background

The New Jersey Legislature adopted a redistricting plan which resulted in a one percent population difference between the largest and smallest districts. Several citizens came forward and challenged the legislation, claiming it violated Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution. The district court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and determined the law to be unconstitutional. The defendants appealed to the Supreme Court.[1][2][3]
The "equal representation" standard of Article I, Section 2 requires districts to be apportioned to population equality to the closest possible degree. The population differences here could have been avoided with a good faith effort to achieve population equality. The Court found that the defendants did not meet their burden of proving that the deviations in their plan were necessary to achieve a consistent, nondiscriminatory redistricting. The State had to prove specifically how and why the specific deviations of its plan were for an objective to benefit the system. The defendant tried to prove that the justification for the high deviations was to preserve voting strength of minority groups. However, the court believed that the state could not prove that the population disparities preserved the voting strength of these minority groups.[1][2][3]
[edit]Opinion of the Court

The Supreme Court upheld the district courts decision based on the evidence and findings and found the redistricting to be unconstitutional in regards to Article I, section 2. The State was compelled to enact a new redistricting plan that followed smaller population deviations of district size.[1][2][3]
[edit]Subsequent developments

This case outlines the importance of redistricting fairly in regards to population size. Or that if there is a goal to preserve a minority area, there must be compelling evidence to indicate that the redistricting plan that does not follow low deviations will successfully preserve the minority vote.[1][2][3]

CASE LAW:http://vanmatre.com/wp-content/uploads/Executive-Summary-of-Bob-Johnson-et-al-v.-State-of-Mo-et-al-Circuit-Court-revised.pdf

  • to check on its legality, and as a result it was ordered to be ... and "disgraceful and improper gerrymandering", He ordered Porter, her ...
    14 KB (2,143 words) - 13:03, 19 November 2012
  • "homes for votes" scandal and was consequently accused of gerrymandering . ...District Auditor to check on its legality, and as a result it was ...
    30 KB (4,399 words) - 21:46, 21 December 2012
  • As a result, the legality of lobbying took "strong and early root" ... were able to win easily in most cases since rules regarding gerrymandering ...
    21 KB (2,971 words) - 01:46, 19 March 2012
  • Daggett, 462 | 725 | 1983, was a United States Supreme Court case involving thelegality of redistricting , and possibly gerrymandering ...
    4 KB (550 words) - 03:01, 23 January 2013
  • Miller v. Johnson 515 | 900 | 1995 | racial gerrymandering | ... Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States 544 | 696 | 2005 | legality of ...
    70 KB (7,543 words) - 23:44, 25 November 2012
  • plans to limit gerrymandering and raise taxes to cut the budget deficit. ... Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the legality of vote pairing. ...
    18 KB (1,968 words) - 01:23, 16 October 2012
  • Due to gerrymandering the Hungarians had a diminished level of ... the case at the Court of Justice of the EU supported the legality of the ban ...
    49 KB (7,095 words) - 05:17, 31 December 2012
  • that Congress did investigate the legality of presidential decisions ... representatives is the practice of gerrymandering After each ten-year ...
    133 KB (17,516 words) - 20:49, 17 January 2013
  • explained how the pre-Proposition 11 Gerrymandering system worked and ...com/politics/2006/09/gerrymandering-why-your-vote-doesnt-count Mother ...
    96 KB (11,676 words) - 02:42, 6 November 2012
  • Duma is one that allowed for gerrymandering, the Duma was used as a ... the supervision of the legality of the actions of Our appointed officials. ...
    64 KB (9,076 words) - 14:21, 17 January 2013
  • the Labour party attacked as gerrymandering as in order to do this ... the government which was that the legality of the war in Iraq was ...
    97 KB (14,058 words) - 20:16, 23 January 2013
  • redistricting was a blatant partisan gerrymander , while Republicans ... hear an appeal that challenged the legality of this redistricting plan. ...
    23 KB (3,002 words) - 02:39, 12 December 2012

'via Blog this'

ALGEBRA OUR WAY TODAY http://bookstore.xlibris.com/Products/SKU-0112143017/Baby-Algebra-For-Baby-and-You.aspxIntroducing baby to algebra as early as the baby shower via algebra themed baby beginnings, such as:mobiles, room plaques, pacifiers and other baby algebra paraphernalia,we inundate baby with the message that algebra is important to baby and family tradition.Baby algebra uses pictures and key words to help Baby to generalize and grasp algebra concepts. Therefore we can think our way through the stepping stones called tests. Colors and images react . Colors with one side of the brain, images with the other side of the brain, together create and complete the learning process inherent at birth . WALLA! Baby does algebra.
Post a Comment