Supreme Court To Rule On Gerrymandering | Soshal Network, Social Circle Connection

Supreme Court To Rule On Gerrymandering


Enjoyed the video ladies check these swimsuits out

Our corporatist Supreme Court is most likely going to make the country even worse once more, as is custom. John Iadarola, Ben Mankiewicz, and also Michael Shure, hosts of The Young Turks, talk about. Inform us what you think in the comment section listed below.

" Partial gerrymandering could be unconstitutional– at the very least theoretically. In the 1986 case of Davis v. Bandemer, the High court did not discover need to state an unconstitutional gerrymander, but its judgment did state "that political gerrymandering situations are correctly justiciable under the Equal Security Condition."

In spite of that judgment, as well as regardless of regular judgments versus racial gerrymanders over the previous five years, the Court hasn't already really declared a solitary political area unconstitutional because it disenfranchises citizens by political celebration. In the 2004 Vieth v. Jubelirer situation, Justice Antonin Scalia's ruling on Pennsylvania legislative districts "ended that political gerrymandering insurance claims are nonjusticiable due to the fact that no judicially discernible and manageable requirements for settling such claims exist."" *.

Read more here:.

Hosts: John Iadarola, Ben Mankiewicz, Michael Shure.

Cast: John Iadarola, Ben Mankiewicz, Michael Shure.


The Largest Online Information Program in the World. Held by Cenk Uygur as well as Ana Kasparian. LIVE STREAMING weekdays 6-8pm ET.

Subscribe to The Young Turks on YouTube:.

Like The Young Turks on Facebook:.
Adhere to The Young Turks on Twitter:.

Buy TYT Merch:.

Download and install sound and video of the full 2 hour program on-demand + the members-only message video game show by coming to be a member at. Your subscription supports the daily operations as well as is vital for our ongoing success and also growth.

Young Turk (n), 1. Youthful progressive or insurgent participant of an organization, motion, or political event. 2. A young adult who rebels against authority or societal expectations.( American Heritage Thesaurus).

Share Your Comments


  1. Posted by Andy Estrada, at Reply

    They’re going to rule in favor of gerrymandering, you’ll see.

    • Posted by nico lai, at Reply

      joaohumbg I don’t personally believe that but there is a case to be made that local representatives are better than voting for a party with a list. Voters have a clear person to talk to and generally a lot of issues are best handled by the local government instead of a statewide government

    • Posted by joaohumbg, at Reply

      nico lai About having a person to talk to directly, I understand your point, but with a first-past-the-post system that person could be elected without even having a majority of the votes, so they can afford not being accountabble to a significant chunk of the population. Secondly, I’m not arguing for centralisation of power, of course many issues are solved better by local government, those exist for a reason (administrative efficiency, of course). But when voting for organs of centralised power, every person should have an equal say in all of the candidates/parties.

    • Posted by nico lai, at Reply

      Im just saying that there is a case for local representatives ( even though in reality in doesnt exactly work like that in my opinion) and there are other voting systems that conserve local representatives and are still better at representing the will of the voters than first past the post.

  2. Posted by Gregory W Trump SS Colonial Militia, at Reply

    We don’t need a supreme court. Drone strike it.

    • Posted by Harry Christofi, at Reply

      +Gregory W Trump SS Colonial Militia Actually we do lol whose gonna supervise all the courts in the country lol

  3. Posted by Dave Gallagher, at Reply

    All systems are go for Republican corruption!

    • Posted by quaxk, at Reply


    • Posted by rouge1ful, at Reply

      he doesnt understand it how?

  4. Posted by Heroic Kekistani Warrior, at Reply

    It is NOT racism to require identification to vote! ALL parties should be concerned with voter fraud.

    • Posted by Artem S, at Reply

      Final Final Judgement on Voter ID

      If you are too incompetent to vote for progressives, you’re too incompetent to have any serious opinions on foreign and domestic policy and should not be voting. Period.

    • Posted by xxtoronto xo, at Reply

      +Hazzycakes you should get used to feeling generalized, everyone else has to.

  5. Posted by quaxk, at Reply

    It’s officially Summer and I can’t think of no better time to tell you progressives this:

    *MAGA B!TCHES! :)*

    • Posted by mike dixie rect, at Reply

      His mom.

    • Posted by mae, at Reply

      its summer, its time to impeach the clown…… AAG BITCHES…. AMERICA ALREADY GREAT!!

  6. Posted by rouge1ful, at Reply

    i hope they rule correctly because gerrymandering along with bullshit voter id laws is proven to discriminate against poor people and black people

    • Posted by Mark Broadhurst, at Reply

      +Jim is the man I totally agree that would be the case I think if everyone required some for of ID to vote we could stop these rogue republicans.

    • Posted by Clorox Bleach, at Reply

      you think blacks are too stupid and poor to know how to get an ID? Wow that’s racist.

    • Posted by Mark Broadhurst, at Reply

      +Clorox Bleach​​ No I think that to ensure the integrity of the system. Some form of ID should be required, and I’m happy to wait till the next election to allow everyone plenty of chance to get an ID.
      Voting is your civic duty you should do it since the government is supposed to represent you and the needs of your community, by not voting you are saying that I don’t want to have a say. If actually true that is fine but given that you are bitching on here about politics have your say and stand up and be counted for what you believe in, whatever that is.

      Liberals on the other hand don’t seem to think you can be bothered, are too lazy, are too poor, etc, etc to get ID in order to validate your vote and not call it in to question.

    • Posted by Deepto Chatterjee, at Reply

      Clorox Bleach Yeah because being proven didn’t mean anything at all because the truth is racist somehow smh

  7. Posted by Xenite227, at Reply

    Republicans only win by corruption and cheating the system… shocker.

    • Posted by 2 Girls With Green eyes, at Reply

      Xenite227 I do not understand at all how on earth any poor or working class person would vote Repub. I just don’t get it, they don’t give 2 shits about poor or working class. Its almost as if they don’t care about their own abuse, in fact they keep supporting their abuser

    • Posted by Amber W, at Reply

      2 Girls With Green eyes they’ve been fed so much disinformation that they no longer know how to tell the difference between facts and propaganda.

    • Posted by Hushai, at Reply

      2 Girls With Green eyes Anyone with an even slightly functional moral compass knows to stay away from the Democratic Party.

    • Posted by Deepto Chatterjee, at Reply

      Xenite227 Don’t want to play devil’s advocate here but democrats also gerrymander.

  8. Posted by Juno Huck, at Reply

    the only people who have notifications on for tyt is the alt right 😂😂

    • Posted by FUCKtrump FUCKtrump, at Reply

      Juno Huck Trump started that fake news bulshit Trump only calls the media real news when they are talking positive about him which is never . Trump in the beginning of his campaign he use the media those very same people he calls fake news he call up mainstream media for free TV time to cover his Rally’s I bet they regret it now only dictators installed doubt in the mind of the population divide and conquer Trump is pure evil a lot of hate crimes tours Muslims and other minorities has happened in the past two years because of trump

  9. Posted by foreverwantingpie, at Reply

    I expressed concern over gerrymandering to a republican today and he says “gerrymandering has existed for as long as this country” ummm okay well slavery existed as long as the US did until we got rid of it is that even an argument ??? Gerrymandering suppresses democracy no matter who is in power.

    • Posted by whyamimrpink78, at Reply

      Evan M, you vote for you local representative in a democratic way. And no, gerrymanding does not violate the equal protection clause. No rights are being violated.

    • Posted by The Timekeeper, at Reply

      +whyamimrpink78 First of all, there is no reason whatsoever for anyone to redraw any district to mirror the Mississippi’s drainage basin except to put a thumb on the scale of fair elections. And for that reason it absolutely does suppress democracy, because regardless of what party is doing it, the entire intention is guarantee a certain outcome. Which, by the way, makes it harder to vote for change.

      Second, the federal government does not serve the states—it serves the people. That’s why federal Senators and Representatives are voted for by the people, not chosen by the states’ legislatures.

      Third, states’ power isn’t the be all, end all of what’s right and proper. If state politicians have redistricted in such a way that they have created unfair state elections and in doing so entrenched themselves, then the state has overstepped its bounds and taken power from the people. Without power and to head off violence, the people must have some other recourse—i.e., some other governing body that can come to their defense. As it’s illogical to have another state exert control over a sibling, the only reasonable answer is to have the federal Supreme Court determine the matter.

    • Posted by mastertoad2, at Reply

      whyamimrpink78 You can’t defend a problem by saying it’s legal. The problem IS that it’s legal.

  10. Posted by Optimus Fine, at Reply

    Gerrymandering is undemocratic. Both Democrats and Republicans are guilty of it. All citizens of the Unites States, regardless of party, should be appauled by gerrymandering if they truly believe in free and fair elections.

    • Posted by Evan M, at Reply



    • Posted by kiEngir77, at Reply

      Optimus Fine ooo

  11. Posted by Charles Jones, at Reply

    I simply can’t have any respect for a Supreme Court that would uphold gerrymandering. It’s no better than cheating. Liberal or Conservative, Democrat or Republican, it shouldn’t make any difference. The whole point of the Supreme Court is to uphold the intentions of the Constitution. Gerrymandering unquestionably goes against it.

    • Posted by zarinah16, at Reply

      Charles Jones They’ll vote for it. It’ll be 5-4 with the new Justice being the last vote. It’s fucked up.

  12. Posted by rocky19421, at Reply

    Gerrymandering, is the only way a Republican can get elected….

    • Posted by Rock Johnson, at Reply

      rocky19421 lol no. Stay salty. 😂

    • Posted by Desecration, at Reply

      … and Democrats. Remember the point behind some of the CRA changes was to force states to give Dems an advantage in predominately Black zones. These were the same regulations Reps used re-rig the system to get even more of them people in (IOW, it backfired on Dems). The Dems weren’t any more interested in finding a balance when it favored them politically. Now that the American base has caught on to both of their scheming they want a system reboot that neither party likes.

      It’s the American people vs the political class.

    • Posted by Vanessthebest, at Reply

      not while rednecks are still going down on some rich guy in their trailer parks, hoping some lint will rub
      off for them. will never happen with don the con and his new swamp of donors, bankers, nazis and his own

  13. Posted by JabberCT, at Reply

    Gerrymandering is legal cheating by republicans. Time to do away with legal corruption.

    • Posted by W N, at Reply

      Never happen! Lobbying is legalized bribery. Corporate Privatization of prisons is legalized slavery. Republicans will always search for more ways to cheat and steal from the American tax payers.

  14. Posted by Allan Bani, at Reply

    Gerrymandering needs to get abolished.

    • Posted by Eric Reese, at Reply

      The hard part is differentiating “gerrymandering” from normal redistricting. It can be a long & tortuous legal fight to argue that this district or that was actually gerrymandered, unless the gerrymander was openly admitted to. The only surefire way is to totally remove people from the equation and have a computer draw the district lines.

    • Posted by Allan Bani, at Reply

      Well it might work.

    • Posted by WobblyBits_X, at Reply

      Votes should not be allocated by districts, end of story. Seats should be allocated by percentage of votes, not according to what district your vote comes from. You don’t even have the “””states rights””” excuse to explain away this bullshit like you do with the presidential vote.

    • Posted by Allan Bani, at Reply


  15. Posted by curandero verde, at Reply

    Gerrymandering is criminal…voting should be based on popular vote….

    • Posted by sailormanariel, at Reply

      All the criticisms on gerrymandering here are accurate. But the real problem is that Democrats never learned how to show rednecks they were on their side. Republicans do not serve their voters. Reps want to destroy all the programs that keep them out of poverty. The lament the redneck Rep voters always use is that “republicans serve the rich, dems serve the blacks, but who serves me?” Rep voters can’t fathom that they have the same issues as minorities and that the programs the dems created (Soc Sec medicare etc) serve all who need them without regard to race. They refuse to believe that THEY are also Mitt Romney’s TAKERS.

    • Posted by W N, at Reply

      That’s why rednecks need to go the way of the dinosaur, extinct. Why? because it is about racism, whites only, intolerance and hypocrisy. They call themselves Christians, but have no clue what that means. Tell them that Jesus wasn’t white, and watch them have fits and short circuit! The wish to relive the Confederate past, a legacy of everything that was wrong with the history of this country. That’s like Germans lamenting the loss of Nazism.

    • Posted by Justin Mielke, at Reply

      curandero verde the problem with a democracy based on the popular vote will become a tyranny of the majority. the founding fathers were trying to avoid that from happening. eventually the country would become a mob

  16. Posted by QED, at Reply

    Perfect gerrymandering can make 33% of the population have 100% of the power. This is ridiculous

    • Posted by Ben Faulkner, at Reply

      33.4 technically

    • Posted by Karan Trivedi, at Reply

      Ben Faulkner 33.33 tilda motherfucker

  17. Posted by Markstubation01, at Reply

    one person, one vote

    • Posted by Öhy, at Reply

      right on

  18. Posted by DISCO-INFERNO-70, at Reply

    One of the stupidest arguments in favor of the electoral college is that states like New York and California would have more power to elect a president, than smaller states.
    They SHOULD have more say, because they have more PEOPLE! It’s incredibly unfair to try to give states like Idaho and Kansas equal voting power to much larger and densely populated states.
    More people = more votes. that’s the way democracy is SUPPOSED to work. The electoral college is incredibly undemocratic, and needs to be abolished.

    • Posted by Sharon Martin, at Reply

      DISCO-INFERNO-70 Everyone gets one vote. So simple, so fair. Whoever gets the most votes wins. Everyones vote counts that way.

    • Posted by Agent Fungus, at Reply

      Sharon: I hope you’re being sarcastic. If not, you are incredibly dumb.

    • Posted by JB252, at Reply

      Agent Fungus care to elaborate on that statement?

    • Posted by Agent Fungus, at Reply

      JB: Electoral college.

    • Posted by WobblyBits_X, at Reply

      +Agent Fungus That’s not “elaboration”. That’s simply stating the name of the institution that is being called unfair and undemocratic.

      Also, don’t try saying “tyranny of the majority” because it’s a specious term and the only alternative to term is tyranny of the minority, also known more simply as “tyranny”.

  19. Posted by llongone2, at Reply

    There’s no way Republicans will allow Gerrymandering to be done away with. Without Gerrymandering, they wouldn’t win another national election…pretty much…ever.