By Matt Rooney | The Save Jersey Blog
How can the phrase “one person one VOTE” can be interpreted to include people who cannot vote?
Ask the majority of the U.S. Supreme Court, Save Jerseyans, who on Monday morning ruled unanimously in Evenwel v. Abbott to reject a challenge to how the prevailing interpretation of the “one man, one vote” rule employed to draw legislative district maps including right here at home in New Jersey.
The Evenwel plaintiffs sought to compel Texas to draw districts with equal numbers of eligible voters as opposed to equal total populations. You can read the full opinion here.
This decision comes less than a week after SCOTUS failed to stop teachers unions from requiring members to opt out of dues payments.
My take on Evenwel? Echoed by the Court’s senior remaining conservative voice. “In my view, the majority has failed to provide a sound basis for the one-person, one-vote principle because no such basis exists,” Justice Thomas wrote in his concurring opinion.
Unsurprisingly, Thomas urged an end of the “misguided search” for a principle and, instead, called for states to determine their own apportionment schemes. “There is no single ‘correct’ method of apportioning state legislatures,” he concluded.
What does it mean for New Jersey? For starters, it almost guarantees that Republicans will have a 0% chance of recapturing the New Jersey State Legislature until at least the next redistricting begins. Republican leaders had begun to war game new maps in case the old map needed to be thrown out.
So it’s actually pretty good news for Florida, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and other leading recipients of New Jersey’s taxpaying refugees who continue to flee our Democrat overlord’s asinine policies.
_____
Title XIX polling districts that elect county committee people are based on registered voters!