Brewing Constitutional Crisis

SoxIlliniRob wrote:Interesting development in PA that falls in line with recent discussions on this topic.  Pennsylvania GOP senate leader is refusing to cooperate with PA supreme court ruling to end gerrymandering.  Looks like he's declared it to be a wrong ruling and fuck the surpreme court.  

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/371684-pa-state-senate-leader-refuses-court-order-on-redrawing-district-maps


I also heard that the US SCOTUS might be considering overruling the state supreme court ruling in PA, which is something I always learned was a huge no-no unless the SCOTUS is ruling in a way that is affording some kind of basic human rights that are being denied at a state level.  So much for state's rights.  

Of course, at some point, the worm will turn and many of these gerrymandered states will be Dem ruled, and the Dems will do the same shit.  They'll gerrymander the MF out of every state they can and then the GOP will be crying the same way the Dems are.  Amazing to me that both parties can't see this as important, but nobody seems to be able to see the forest through the trees.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

Of course, at some point, the worm will turn and many of these gerrymandered states will be Dem ruled, and the Dems will do the same shit.  They'll gerrymander the MF out of every state they can and then the GOP will be crying the same way the Dems are.  Amazing to me that both parties can't see this as important, but nobody seems to be able to see the forest through the trees.

alohafri wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

Of course, at some point, the worm will turn and many of these gerrymandered states will be Dem ruled, and the Dems will do the same shit.  They'll gerrymander the MF out of every state they can and then the GOP will be crying the same way the Dems are.  Amazing to me that both parties can't see this as important, but nobody seems to be able to see the forest through the trees.

Kind of like Illinois. They'll have Mike Madigan on speed dial.

blondy28 wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:Interesting development in PA that falls in line with recent discussions on this topic.  Pennsylvania GOP senate leader is refusing to cooperate with PA supreme court ruling to end gerrymandering.  Looks like he's declared it to be a wrong ruling and fuck the surpreme court.  

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/371684-pa-state-senate-leader-refuses-court-order-on-redrawing-district-maps


I also heard that the US SCOTUS might be considering overruling the state supreme court ruling in PA, which is something I always learned was a huge no-no unless the SCOTUS is ruling in a way that is affording some kind of basic human rights that are being denied at a state level.  So much for state's rights.  

Of course, at some point, the worm will turn and many of these gerrymandered states will be Dem ruled, and the Dems will do the same shit.  They'll gerrymander the MF out of every state they can and then the GOP will be crying the same way the Dems are.  Amazing to me that both parties can't see this as important, but nobody seems to be able to see the forest through the trees.

My district boundaries are absurd.  I live in assclown Peter Roskam's district.  The thing is, Roskam has run unopposed quite a few times.  I think he's a 6 termer (and one of the authors of the tax scam that's killing me).  If the dems are going to gerrymander...geez, at least put some effort into getting a formidable candidate to run against the Republican in that district!  We do have a pretty good shot at ousting Roskam this year.   The thing about Illinois is regardless of the state's efforts to gerrymander, I think if you look at the numbers, the percentage of dems and repubs in the congress do represent the breakdown of our state pretty accurately.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:I woulda thought Foster would be very pro teacher, pro education, too.

alohafri wrote:

My district boundaries are absurd.  I live in assclown Peter Roskam's district.  The thing is, Roskam has run unopposed quite a few times.  I think he's a 6 termer (and one of the authors of the tax scam that's killing me).  If the dems are going to gerrymander...geez, at least put some effort into getting a formidable candidate to run against the Republican in that district!  We do have a pretty good shot at ousting Roskam this year.   The thing about Illinois is regardless of the state's efforts to gerrymander, I think if you look at the numbers, the percentage of dems and repubs in the congress do represent the breakdown of our state pretty accurately.

Meanwhile, the district to my immediate northeast (Hinsdale, Burr Ridge, Oak Brook) has asshat Mike Quigley who is from freaking Wrigleyville! My gerrymandered district has Bill Foster after years of Judy Biggert. I don't mind Foster, he's pretty quiet, but Biggert was a HUGE supporter of teachers and regularly got the backing of the local teachers' unions.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

alohafri wrote:

My district boundaries are absurd.  I live in assclown Peter Roskam's district.  The thing is, Roskam has run unopposed quite a few times.  I think he's a 6 termer (and one of the authors of the tax scam that's killing me).  If the dems are going to gerrymander...geez, at least put some effort into getting a formidable candidate to run against the Republican in that district!  We do have a pretty good shot at ousting Roskam this year.   The thing about Illinois is regardless of the state's efforts to gerrymander, I think if you look at the numbers, the percentage of dems and repubs in the congress do represent the breakdown of our state pretty accurately.

Meanwhile, the district to my immediate northeast (Hinsdale, Burr Ridge, Oak Brook) has asshat Mike Quigley who is from freaking Wrigleyville! My gerrymandered district has Bill Foster after years of Judy Biggert. I don't mind Foster, he's pretty quiet, but Biggert was a HUGE supporter of teachers and regularly got the backing of the local teachers' unions.

Overall, I can live with the weird boundaries if the general proportion of representation is reasonable.  When a state is about a 50/50 mix of Dems and GOP voters, there shouldn't be a 15-6 or 12-5 lopsided majority on House representation, and that applies to either party.  It's just not right, and it's amazing to me that it seems like SCOTUS is going to be ok with leaving it as it is and letting us continue to gerrymander.  If it shakes out that the courts say it's ok, look for state elections to become FAR, FAR, FAR more serious and often times fraught with fraud and cheating in order to get that local edge that'll allow parties to rewrite the boundaries in their favor.  Assuming a Dem wins the state of Illinois governor's race in 2018 and keeps its majorities in 2020, prepare to see the lines redrawn in ridiculous fashion (as if they aren't silly already) in an effort to counter what's happened in Wisconsin, PA, and VA.  Same will be the case in California.  And then similar will happen in consistently red states to the point where this will just become a big game, the same as how the billionaires now just buy the political agenda because the courts said it's ok to do that.

alohafri wrote:


That's why I am 100% in favor of a non-partisan committee in each state drawing the lines, being supervised by a non-partisan national committee.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

alohafri wrote:


That's why I am 100% in favor of a non-partisan committee in each state drawing the lines, being supervised by a non-partisan national committee.

That would be awesome, although is anything REALLY nonpartisan anymore?

alohafri wrote:

Meanwhile, the district to my immediate northeast (Hinsdale, Burr Ridge, Oak Brook) has asshat Mike Quigley who is from freaking Wrigleyville! 

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

alohafri wrote:

Meanwhile, the district to my immediate northeast (Hinsdale, Burr Ridge, Oak Brook) has asshat Mike Quigley who is from freaking Wrigleyville! 

What's not to like about Quigley?  He looks like a younger Rosebowl.  Even has a bit of his voice.

blondy28 wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:Interesting development in PA that falls in line with recent discussions on this topic.  Pennsylvania GOP senate leader is refusing to cooperate with PA supreme court ruling to end gerrymandering.  Looks like he's declared it to be a wrong ruling and fuck the surpreme court.  

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/371684-pa-state-senate-leader-refuses-court-order-on-redrawing-district-maps


I also heard that the US SCOTUS might be considering overruling the state supreme court ruling in PA, which is something I always learned was a huge no-no unless the SCOTUS is ruling in a way that is affording some kind of basic human rights that are being denied at a state level.  So much for state's rights.  

Of course, at some point, the worm will turn and many of these gerrymandered states will be Dem ruled, and the Dems will do the same shit.  They'll gerrymander the MF out of every state they can and then the GOP will be crying the same way the Dems are.  Amazing to me that both parties can't see this as important, but nobody seems to be able to see the forest through the trees.

My district boundaries are absurd.  I live in assclown Peter Roskam's district.  The thing is, Roskam has run unopposed quite a few times.  I think he's a 6 termer (and one of the authors of the tax scam that's killing me).  If the dems are going to gerrymander...geez, at least put some effort into getting a formidable candidate to run against the Republican in that district!  We do have a pretty good shot at ousting Roskam this year.   The thing about Illinois is regardless of the state's efforts to gerrymander, I think if you look at the numbers, the percentage of dems and repubs in the congress do represent the breakdown of our state pretty accurately.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:That's great and all, Frank, but how in the hell was SCOTUS involved in this?  How does a state court appeal to the fed?  Baffling, but glad it ended up this way.

frank bonifacic wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:That's great and all, Frank, but how in the hell was SCOTUS involved in this?  How does a state court appeal to the fed?  Baffling, but glad it ended up this way.

No. The PA legislature and/or the State appealed their SC decision to US Supreme Court on a basis of court overruling legislature -separation of powers etc.

US SC refused to take case so decision stands

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

frank bonifacic wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:That's great and all, Frank, but how in the hell was SCOTUS involved in this?  How does a state court appeal to the fed?  Baffling, but glad it ended up this way.

No. The PA legislature and/or the State appealed their SC decision to US Supreme Court on a basis of court overruling legislature -separation of powers etc.

US SC refused to take case so decision stands

Good.  Glad to hear it, as I'm uncertain as to why it would be the SCOTUS's business to be involved in the PA decision.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

frank bonifacic wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:That's great and all, Frank, but how in the hell was SCOTUS involved in this?  How does a state court appeal to the fed?  Baffling, but glad it ended up this way.

No. The PA legislature and/or the State appealed their SC decision to US Supreme Court on a basis of court overruling legislature -separation of powers etc.

US SC refused to take case so decision stands

Good.  Glad to hear it, as I'm uncertain as to why it would be the SCOTUS's business to be involved in the PA decision.

frank bonifacic wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:Interesting development in PA that falls in line with recent discussions on this topic.  Pennsylvania GOP senate leader is refusing to cooperate with PA supreme court ruling to end gerrymandering.  Looks like he's declared it to be a wrong ruling and fuck the surpreme court.  

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/371684-pa-state-senate-leader-refuses-court-order-on-redrawing-district-maps


I also heard that the US SCOTUS might be considering overruling the state supreme court ruling in PA, which is something I always learned was a huge no-no unless the SCOTUS is ruling in a way that is affording some kind of basic human rights that are being denied at a state level.  So much for state's rights.  

Of course, at some point, the worm will turn and many of these gerrymandered states will be Dem ruled, and the Dems will do the same shit.  They'll gerrymander the MF out of every state they can and then the GOP will be crying the same way the Dems are.  Amazing to me that both parties can't see this as important, but nobody seems to be able to see the forest through the trees.

My district boundaries are absurd.  I live in assclown Peter Roskam's district.  The thing is, Roskam has run unopposed quite a few times.  I think he's a 6 termer (and one of the authors of the tax scam that's killing me).  If the dems are going to gerrymander...geez, at least put some effort into getting a formidable candidate to run against the Republican in that district!  We do have a pretty good shot at ousting Roskam this year.   The thing about Illinois is regardless of the state's efforts to gerrymander, I think if you look at the numbers, the percentage of dems and repubs in the congress do represent the breakdown of our state pretty accurately.

 This just in. U.S. Supreme Court denied PA appeal. 
They have until Friday to come up with new map-and Governor has to sign off by Friday the 15th. If not, PA Supreme Court said '" THEY WILL DRAW MAP!" 
Hooray for America. 

alohafri wrote:

frank bonifacic wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:Interesting development in PA that falls in line with recent discussions on this topic.  Pennsylvania GOP senate leader is refusing to cooperate with PA supreme court ruling to end gerrymandering.  Looks like he's declared it to be a wrong ruling and fuck the surpreme court.  

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/371684-pa-state-senate-leader-refuses-court-order-on-redrawing-district-maps


I also heard that the US SCOTUS might be considering overruling the state supreme court ruling in PA, which is something I always learned was a huge no-no unless the SCOTUS is ruling in a way that is affording some kind of basic human rights that are being denied at a state level.  So much for state's rights.  

Of course, at some point, the worm will turn and many of these gerrymandered states will be Dem ruled, and the Dems will do the same shit.  They'll gerrymander the MF out of every state they can and then the GOP will be crying the same way the Dems are.  Amazing to me that both parties can't see this as important, but nobody seems to be able to see the forest through the trees.

My district boundaries are absurd.  I live in assclown Peter Roskam's district.  The thing is, Roskam has run unopposed quite a few times.  I think he's a 6 termer (and one of the authors of the tax scam that's killing me).  If the dems are going to gerrymander...geez, at least put some effort into getting a formidable candidate to run against the Republican in that district!  We do have a pretty good shot at ousting Roskam this year.   The thing about Illinois is regardless of the state's efforts to gerrymander, I think if you look at the numbers, the percentage of dems and repubs in the congress do represent the breakdown of our state pretty accurately.

 This just in. U.S. Supreme Court denied PA appeal. 
They have until Friday to come up with new map-and Governor has to sign off by Friday the 15th. If not, PA Supreme Court said '" THEY WILL DRAW MAP!" 
Hooray for America. 

Now they need to do the same for Illinois. But somehow, I think Lord Madigan is more powerful than the USSC.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:I saw today that the PA Gen'l Assembly is contemplating the impeachment of the PA Supreme Court as punishment for having ruled against the wishes of the GOP in this instance.  What in the world are we coming to?  Maybe this is mostly bullshit and maybe they are only threatening it, but if we can impeach a judge for simply disliking his ruling, what's the point of having a court?  Due to the gerrymandering of that state, I'm sure they can put together the proper majorities to impeach and convict as many of those judges as they wish.