|
Showing 1 - 5 of
5 matches in All Departments
State legislatures are tasked with drawing state and federal
districts and administering election law, among many other
responsibilities. Yet state legislatures are themselves
gerrymandered. This book examines how, why, and with what
consequences, drawing on an original dataset of ninety-five state
legislative maps from before and after 2011 redistricting.
Identifying the institutional, political, and geographic
determinants of gerrymandering, the authors find that Republican
gerrymandering increased dramatically after the 2011 redistricting
and bias was most extreme in states with racial segregation where
Republicans drew the maps. This bias has had long-term
consequences. For instance, states with the most extreme Republican
gerrymandering were more likely to pass laws that restricted voting
rights and undermined public health, and they were less likely to
respond to COVID-19. The authors examine the implications for
American democracy and for the balance of power between federal and
state government; they also offer empirically grounded
recommendations for reform.
State legislatures are tasked with drawing state and federal
districts and administering election law, among many other
responsibilities. Yet state legislatures are themselves
gerrymandered. This book examines how, why, and with what
consequences, drawing on an original dataset of ninety-five state
legislative maps from before and after 2011 redistricting.
Identifying the institutional, political, and geographic
determinants of gerrymandering, the authors find that Republican
gerrymandering increased dramatically after the 2011 redistricting
and bias was most extreme in states with racial segregation where
Republicans drew the maps. This bias has had long-term
consequences. For instance, states with the most extreme Republican
gerrymandering were more likely to pass laws that restricted voting
rights and undermined public health, and they were less likely to
respond to COVID-19. The authors examine the implications for
American democracy and for the balance of power between federal and
state government; they also offer empirically grounded
recommendations for reform.
This book considers the political and constitutional consequences
of Vieth v. Jubelirer (2004), where the Supreme Court held that
partisan gerrymandering challenges could no longer be adjudicated
by the courts. Through a rigorous scientific analysis of US House
district maps, the authors argue that partisan bias increased
dramatically in the 2010 redistricting round after the Vieth
decision, both at the national and state level. From a
constitutional perspective, unrestrained partisan gerrymandering
poses a critical threat to a central pillar of American democracy,
popular sovereignty. State legislatures now effectively determine
the political composition of the US House. The book answers the
Court's challenge to find a new standard for gerrymandering that is
both constitutionally grounded and legally manageable. It argues
that the scientifically rigorous partisan symmetry measure is an
appropriate legal standard for partisan gerrymandering, as it
logically implies the constitutional right to individual equality
and can be practically applied.
This book considers the political and constitutional consequences
of Vieth v. Jubelirer (2004), where the Supreme Court held that
partisan gerrymandering challenges could no longer be adjudicated
by the courts. Through a rigorous scientific analysis of US House
district maps, the authors argue that partisan bias increased
dramatically in the 2010 redistricting round after the Vieth
decision, both at the national and state level. From a
constitutional perspective, unrestrained partisan gerrymandering
poses a critical threat to a central pillar of American democracy,
popular sovereignty. State legislatures now effectively determine
the political composition of the US House. The book answers the
Court's challenge to find a new standard for gerrymandering that is
both constitutionally grounded and legally manageable. It argues
that the scientifically rigorous partisan symmetry measure is an
appropriate legal standard for partisan gerrymandering, as it
logically implies the constitutional right to individual equality
and can be practically applied.
This book considers the political and constitutional consequences
of Vieth v. Jubelirer (2004), where the Supreme Court held that
partisan gerrymandering challenges could no longer be adjudicated
by the courts. Through a rigorous scientific analysis of US House
district maps, the authors argue that partisan bias increased
dramatically in the 2010 redistricting round after the Vieth
decision, both at the national and state level. From a
constitutional perspective, unrestrained partisan gerrymandering
poses a critical threat to a central pillar of American democracy,
popular sovereignty. State legislatures now effectively determine
the political composition of the US House. The book answers the
Court's challenge to find a new standard for gerrymandering that is
both constitutionally grounded and legally manageable. It argues
that the scientifically rigorous partisan symmetry measure is an
appropriate legal standard for partisan gerrymandering, as it
logically implies the constitutional right to individual equality
and can be practically applied.
|
You may like...
Loot
Nadine Gordimer
Paperback
(2)
R398
R330
Discovery Miles 3 300
|