Nick Anderson by Nick Anderson

Nick Anderson

Comments (13) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, over 3 years ago

    The decision is understandable, as it is not fair to make judgments based on data forty years old.

    The problem is that the next move is up to Congress, which will do what it does best: posture, preen, and do nothing. Whether this was the intention of the Court, the effect of the decision is that the act no longer exists, and is unlikely to ever be resurrected.

    Jim Crowe drivers: Start your engines. It’s open season.

  2. ODon

    ODon said, over 3 years ago

    Texas Republicans are rejoicing: “You say gerrymandering we say power to the deserving few.”

  3. wbr

    wbr said, over 3 years ago

    saying new data is needed to determine where the law should be applied is bad in what way?

  4. Hawthorne

    Hawthorne said, over 3 years ago

    " And we need voting and campaign reform, this will never happen unless we unite and vote out the conservatives and tea-baggers.."

    Realistically, we’ve got to get most of them on both sides of the aisle out.

    The neocons are responsible for pushing most of the destructive political stuff that is happening, but when exactly, have the Dems followed up their rhetoric? Have they ever corrected anything they perceived the GOP to have done wrong?

    My memory isn’t perfect, but it’s pretty functional on the whole. Looks to me like none of them is working for anyone but themselves and the plutocrats. The Dems have better manners, but we can’t eat that any more than they can eat money. All our politicians appear to believe that they can eat money. So be it.

    Serious education reform is certainly necessary/

  5. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, over 3 years ago

    Clarence Thomas is a LIBERAL? Tigger, son, are you INSANE? He’s among the most conservative members of the Court!

  6. ODon

    ODon said, over 3 years ago

    I didn’t say anything here about approving gerrymandering by Democrats that’s your incorrect takeaway.
    Please refer to my hours earlier post on Matt Wuerker’s toon.

  7. ODon

    ODon said, over 3 years ago


    I doubt he is insane, but observation says “often oblivious” would be accurate.

  8. pirate227

    pirate227 said, over 3 years ago

    Wait for it… here come the attempts to disenfranchise voters 21st century style.

  9. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 3 years ago

    @I Play One On TV

    I agree that it’s not fair to make judgments based on data that’s forty years old — but is it unconstitutional? There’s nothing in the constitution that says a law has to be good, or even (in some abstract sense) fair. (It has to be fair in a certain reasonably defined way — such as “equal protection under the law”, but not fair in every conceivable way.) If Congress wants to pass a bad law, that’s up to Congress, not up to the Supreme Court. But this Court, or at least a majority much of the time, seems to think that they can do the job of Congress. It’s an activist court, on the right.

  10. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, over 3 years ago


    Good point. But I think you hit the nail on the head with the “equal protection” clause. Idaho is the headquarters of the Aryan Nation. None of Idaho’s voter repression (I’m not saying there is any, I’m using it only as an example) would be covered under the previous data, which basically was the South.

    True, it’s an activist court, but activism is rarely noticed unless it goes against the viewpoint of the observer.

  11. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 3 years ago

    @I Play One On TV

    Here’s an example of equal protection — it’s illegal for both the rich and the poor to sleep on park benches.

  12. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 3 years ago

    I’m glad that you caught my allusion. France is a great writer, well worth reading. “Penguin Island” is particularly interesting, and “Thais” as well.

  13. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 3 years ago

    As I recall, Penguin Island was on the Catholic Index of forbidden books — for doctrinal reasons — the main character is a priest who baptizes a flock of penguins.

  14. Refresh Comments.