First Consul Tate Reeves had a few things to say about redistricting on social media this afternoon:
As I said last week, there are a lot of moving parts and complexities to consider with respect to the next steps on redistricting in (at least) three separate and distinct areas:1) Legislative;2) Judicial; and3) Congressional.Each of these requires thoughtful consideration of all potential cause and affects and, in some cases, may even require further clarity from the courts.Today, we got an additional piece of judicial clarity as the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the 2025 order of the lower court requiring Mississippi to redraw three state legislative districts. The U.S. Supreme Court has again recognized that race may not be considered in drawing legislative maps. They also remanded this case back to the original three judge panel - an opinion that we believe ultimately results in the 2022 legislative maps being reinstated.This opinion and decision is another win for the principle that all Americans are created equal.In Mississippi, we have much more work to do to get our maps fully fixed (in all three areas mentioned above) after years of unconstitutional requirements placed on the state by the lower courts. But… today is another good day for Mississippi and America!
7 comments:
Once again Tate is the adult in the room. It might be possible to make District Two difficult for Democrats, but one doesn't yell to the world those intentions - in so many words. Layer the argument in phrases than can pass (even weakened) judicial muster.
But, I think the proper word is "effect," not "affect."
Get the haters off of you TATE! Say again for the people in the balcony!
Make no mistake Tater, Mississippi has NEVER done it right. Before the Voting Rights Act "all Americans are created equal" had nothing to do with Mississippi. Now after the excesses of the Act have been corrected, Mississippi has a chance to get it right and show the nation that we will not be motivated by partisan or racial animus in drawing fair districts. Can we do it?
Redistricting must happen.
No one complained when Mike Espy was the Congressman. Why? He worked with others. Bennie's got in there. He didn't want any competition so he pushed to expand his district to include more Jackson precincts.
KF, it really doesn't matter to of the folks making noise in the room without paying attention to the law or the facts - who the congressman from the district happens to be at present. The point is, as noted by a couple of earlier comments, the Gov has taken the adult approach to this matter and for that matter the correct approach that will survive judicial scrutiny, unlike many wanna'bes.
And no, Thompson did not push for some more Jackson precincts but for all, and all of Madison, which would have given him a whiter district, which would have been to the detriment of CD3 congressman Guest but not spreading Thompson's district to Louisiana. Besides, ignoring your mistake, Thompson had no control or influence in the redistricting process as it was controlled by us in the legislature, not them.
Forgetting that, gotta give kudos to Reeves, who made the smart move with his call for a Special Session to deal with Judge Aycock's pending hearing, cancelling the special following SCOTUS ruling on Callais, and not falling on the sword to quickly on the legislative matter.
Question now is, what/when to act? Should they come back to a special this fall to address the Supreme Court districts which would also affect the Transportation and Public Service elections who have a qualifying deadline for early '27? Maybe even letting the legislature follow the Powdermilk Bisquit concept of allowing them to 'do what needs to be done' and do away with the election of these district commissioners going into next year's elections?
No no no Fish, people did complain back then, but times and demographics of the electorate were different and you were either too young to remember or not paying attention. There were lots and lots of discussions about the district and the congressman, but there was a different interpretation of Article 2 of the VRA and there was little or nothing that could be done meaning that there was no reason for loud and continuous voices during those days.
Post a Comment