The most extreme manipulations of the map are seen in states such as Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and MI, where single-party control of the redistricting process has allowed the G.O.P.to entrench an advantage. If the Court "illegitimately invades" that domain, he warned, it will "invite the losers in the redistricting process to seek to obtain in court what they could not achieve in the political arena". It will consider a lower court's ruling that, if allowed to stand, will require the judiciary to determine whether and when partisanship in drawing electoral districts - something as old as the Constitution - is unconstitutional.
The case, one of numerous cases that followed the redistricting process in Wisconsin and elsewhere, drew almost 50 amicus briefs, including briefs from members of Congress, state legislators, state governors, and groups on both sides of the issue.
Whitford involves the Wisconsin state assembly maps - maps that were drawn to make it virtually impossible for Republicans to lose their majority. They worked in secret to fashion precise, computer-generated maps and won approval on a party-line vote. The state would have to produce some justification for those maps, he said. In one analysis, Democrats captured far fewer state Assembly seats even when they won roughly the same percentage of the statewide vote as Republicans.
"I am sure you are, however, familiar with the Justices' concerns surrounding the live broadcast or streaming of oral arguments, which could adversely affect the character and quality of the dialogue between the attorneys and Justices", Mr. Minear said in a letter sent to the lawmakers Monday. He didn't find one in that case, ruling against Democrats challenging a Republican gerrymander in the state.
A handful of Republican elected officials, including U.S. Sen. A strategy called gerrymandering.
"From our vantage point, we see wasted votes and silenced voices".
"We have the chance, with this case, to put power back into the hands of the people whose rights are under attack".
So how do we draw better district maps?
Texas Solicitor General Scott Keller told the justices that "political competition is a necessary component of legislative-controlled redistricting".
Wendy Tam Cho, a University of IL political science professor, says this case is particularly important because it could determine the court's role in future cases on gerrymandering.
At issue are maps drawn in Wisconsin after the last census that Democrats say were drawn unconstitutionally to benefit Republicans. The court will hear the arguments in the case this week.
It seems highly likely that the four liberal-leaning justices will vote to affirm the lower court opinion invalidating the plan. The court has a 5-4 conservative majority.
The court will decide the extent of religious liberties in a case of a cake shop owner who refused to do business for a gay couple because of his religious objections. "The main problem for me", he said, "is that in every case that comes before us, we will have to decide whether the Democrat wins or the Republican wins". During the last term, Justice Samuel Alito dissented in Cooper v. Harris, a case concerning race-based redistricting in North Carolina. "D.R. Horton was the first to make that move, and that's a pretty radical move, to say for the first time that NLRA overrides those other statutes", Wall said.
That's what happened - when legislatures bothered to redraw the lines at all.
"I'm obviously disappointed by what the court did [in Texas]", Holder said.
Unfortunately, even after Floridians spoke out loudly, the state Legislature continued to draw partisan maps that were rejected by the courts.
Annabelle Harless is an attorney for plaintiffs in the case, who argue the maps gave the GOP an unfair advantage by drawing district lines that waste Democratic votes.
The court isn't immune to the racial context of the controversies Trump has involved himself in, from the NFL protests about police discrimination during the national anthem to his "both sides" reaction to the white nationalist demonstration in Charlottesville, Virginia, that left one counter-protestor dead. The Chicago study argues you can measure partisan gerrymandering by comparing each party's "wasted votes": votes cast for the losing candidate on the one hand, and on the other, votes cast for the victor beyond the 50-percent needed to clinch victory.