when will the wisconsin gerrymandering case be decided
Gill v. Whitford A decision in the case is expected by June 2018.[25] Subsequent to the oral arguments, the Court had agreed to hear one other partisan redistricting case in the same term: Benisek v. Lamone, accepted in December 2017 and heard by the Court in March 2018, which is based on Democratic-favored redistricting of Maryland's 6th congressional district.[32]
United States House of Representatives States typically redraw district boundaries after each census, though they may do so at other times, such as the 2003 Texas redistricting. Each state determines its own district boundaries, either through legislation or through non-partisan panels. "Malapportionment" is unconstitutional and districts must be approximately equal in population (see Wesberry v. Sanders). Additionally, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibits redistricting plans that are intended to, or have the effect of, discriminating against racial or language minority voters.[12] Aside from malapportionment and discrimination against racial or language minorities, federal courts have allowed state legislatures to engage in gerrymandering for the benefit of political parties or incumbents.[13][14] In a 1984 case, Davis v. Bandemer, the Supreme Court held that gerrymandered districts could be struck down on the basis of the Equal Protection Clause, but the Court did not articulate a standard for when districts are impermissibly gerrymandered. However, the Court overruled Davis in 2004 in Vieth v. Jubelirer, and Court precedent currently holds gerrymandering to be a political question. According to calculations made by Burt Neuborne using criteria set forth by the American Political Science Association, about 40 seats, less than 10% of the House membership, are chosen through a genuinely contested electoral process, given partisan gerrymandering.[15][16]
Marcus Álvarez
Economic nationalism While the coining of the term "