Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Uncle Sam's avatar

There are a number of ways we can resolve the problems you correctly point to in our democracy with simple majorities, no constitutional amendments needed: national popular vote compact to bypass the electoral college, end the filibuster by 51 senate votes to change that senate rule, end gerrymandering by legislation, balance the senate by dividing the existing largest states into more evenly sized ones, change the process and number of judicial appointments by legislation. I would love to discuss these topics as well as some more out of the box ones with you sometime.

Expand full comment
Jack Jordan's avatar

Has anyone ever challenged gerrymandering as abridging the freedom of speech and right to assemble? Obviously, gerrymandering dates back to the generation that framed and ratified the original Constitution. But something significant has changed since then.

Only about 90 years ago did SCOTUS justices (finally) start supporting and defending our Constitution with respect to the freedom of speech and press and the right of the people to assemble in the First Amendment. So its very good to look at this very antiquated practice with fresh eyes. Gerrymandering based on how people vote is nothing less than discrimination against people based on their political speech (i.e., voting). See, e.g., the following:

Sam's Club (SCOTUS) Says Separate-But-Equal Is Cool https://blackcollarcrime.substack.com/p/scotus-says-separate-but-equal-is?r=30ufvh

Alito's Gang Advocates and Protects "Political Apartheid" https://blackcollarcrime.substack.com/p/the-alito-gang-advocates-and-protects?r=30ufvh

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts