Tom DeLay's Texas redistricting plan, which was deemed illegal by DOJ staffers, but whos findings were suppressed by the Bush administration, will be heard by the Supreme Court. The reason it was deemed to be illegal by the DOJ, was because it diluted minority districts in order for DeLay to create districts that favored Republicans, thus giving the Republicans a sharp advantage in the House.
Alito, has offered an opinion that he does not believe in the one-man one-vote rule. Alito was critical of the Warren court that established the judicial rule that every American's vote should carry the same amount of importance as every other American's vote. Prior to the Warren court decision, states often had situations where congressional districts were not apportioned by population. Therefore, some people were given less of a voice in our democracy than others. How one-man, one-vote is a bad thing, is beyond me. But, apparently Alito doesn't think it is necessary for a functioning democracy.
So, since Alito would most likely hear the Texas redistricting case, and since he is opposed to the judicial rule of ensuring equal voting rights, it does not appear that the outcome of the hearing will be in favor of the Voting Rights Act.
Just a nother reason I don't like Alito... I wonder if he supports strip searches in order to vote?...
Top court to review Texas redistricting plan
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court said on Monday that it would decide a challenge by Democrats and minority groups to the controversial 2003 Republican-supported congressional redistricting plan in Texas.
The justices agreed to review a ruling by a federal three-judge panel that upheld the bitterly contested map, which had been strongly supported by U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay of Texas.
DeLay, the former second-ranking Republican in the House of Representatives, faces money laundering charges in Texas as part of a campaign finance investigation. He has denied any wrongdoing.
The Texas Legislature adopted the redistricting plan after calling three special sessions. Democrats stymied efforts to approve the plan at the first two sessions by leaving the state and denying Republicans a quorum.
Those challenging the redistricting plan argued it amounted to an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander by manipulating voting districts to give one party an unfair advantage and that it diluted the voting strength of minorities.
They said the plan shifted more than 8 million Texans into new districts and that it was designed in 2003 to protect all 15 Republican members of Congress and to defeat at least seven of the 17 Democratic members.
More on the Supreme Court taking on the redistricting plan
CS Monitor - Supreme Court to weigh Texas redistricting
WaPo- Justices To Review DeLay-Led Districting