Republicans, United States, Beja discussed on So That Happened

So That Happened
|

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

King in the north carolina case as you had a republican who was overseeing the redistricting process and he was asked why are we drawing a map that gives an advantage to ten republicans and three democrats who it's going to be the breakdown of the congressional delegation in he said in a in a meeting of state lawmakers while it's because i don't think it's possible to draw a map that gives republicans and eleven to advantage sovereign of a clear intent it's this clear brazen partisan intent and what the plaintiffs are saying to the us supreme court which is where the north carolina cases now is this is a clear unquestionable brazen example of partisan intentional gerrymandering and if this is an unconstitutional if this doesn't violate those protections on freedom of expression on equal protection what else does and in the pennsylvania case uh at aurel argument last week the lawyers for the republican lawmakers didn't even try and defend intentionally drawing the maps to advantage republicans what they said is the legislatures of political body and makes sense that it can take politics to an into account and so it did it didn't say there is a legitimate justification for these maps it didn't sit they didn't say we can we there's a substantial policy interests that were advancing beja said we can draw this to advantage republicans it makes sense that we did and so we did it and that's it now i don't wanna make this too much about m horse races and who's up in who's down all that stuff you know what matters here is that people out of participate in a democracy and there's might pretty core democratic principles at stake with this but it is a partisan fight it is a partisan dispute if these maps or redrawn if the if they actually are redrawn before the elections is this year does that have a potential to impact who is in in control.

Coming up next