Evenwel v. Abbott
>As constitutional history, precedent, and practice demonstrate, a state or locality may draw its legislative districts based on total population.
Challenger wanted the districts to be based on ELIGIBLE VOTERS instead of TOTAL POPULATION
8-0 voting
>tfw unanimous decision
I don't get it.
>>70716210
What the fuck are you talking about you hagas eating fuck?
Articulate please.
>>70717534
>I don't get it.
Means illegals, felons (where applicable), expats, and kids are excluded from consideration when drawing legislative districts. This has a big effect in states with high illegal populations like California and Texas.
>>70718103
So now lines will be drawn based only on the total eligible voters rather than population in an area? Or the opposite?
>>70718239
According to the Court, states may use the total population of a place instead of the eligible voters only.
Although, as per Ginsburg, this is not a requirement; it's merely stating common practice and historical precedent.
>>70718048
See >>70718344
>>70717534
>>70717609
For additional details
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/evenwel-v-abbott/
>>70718452
So commiefornia can now have even more spic representation. Fuck me.
>>70718103
>are excluded from consideration
that was before right? here says exactly the opposite: >>70718344
>a state or locality may draw its legislative districts based on total population.
It would have made since to make this case about counting only citizens, including children and prisoners versus the total population which counts illegal aliens. They missed a good opportunity.
