It's almost surprising the courts are saying the Republicans can enact an illegal map because they ran out the clock. Almost. Our democracy is in a bad place.

5 hours ago, ryanlammi said:

It's almost surprising the courts are saying the Republicans can enact an illegal map because they ran out the clock. Almost. Our democracy is in a bad place.

I'm about to vote with my feet.   Ohio is really going downhill as the Trumpism takes over.  

Does this make you as furious as it makes me? What are we going to do about it?

 

 

I don't think I want to live in Ohio anymore 

 

 

45 minutes ago, KJP said:

I don't think I want to live in Ohio anymore 

 

 

 

My biggest concern now is that they don't even adopt a new map at all. Earlier today Ken Faber had produced a new draft map which actually seemed pretty reasonable. I don't think the map got any discussion at the hearing.

5 hours ago, KJP said:

I don't think I want to live in Ohio anymore 

 

 

I’ve always thought I’d sell my rentals off but keep a condo downtown when I retire in a few years but I’m seriously reconsidering. 

The only hope left is the the Ohio Supreme Court holds them in contempt but it seems like that's too late or would only end up with a judgement that would have no teeth. I guess the long-term goal would be to do another round of reforms that copy Michigan's setup but that would be 20 years of one party rule.

17 hours ago, LlamaLawyer said:

 

My biggest concern now is that they don't even adopt a new map at all. Earlier today Ken Faber had produced a new draft map which actually seemed pretty reasonable. I don't think the map got any discussion at the hearing.

 

Here's that map:
 

 

Just tell me where to sign up...

 

 

11 hours ago, KJP said:

Just tell me where to sign up...

 

 

 

Just think carefully about who you're having removed because the replacement for DeWine, LaRose, or Faber is guaranteed to be worse.

OH Supreme Court has AGAIN struck down the state legislative maps. Fire thread with more details below, but still no indication that OH SC will hold redistricting commissioners in contempt, meaning that we will still be using the illegal maps when we vote later this year (barring some miracle). (This is STATE legislature maps, not Congressional redistricting.)
 

 

 

Republican judges: states’ rights, unless we don’t like the decisions they make. 
 

 

On 2/8/2022 at 11:55 AM, DarkandStormy said:

I mean, the legislature is just going to keep gerrymandering until we get to the point of no return and then LaRose will just enforce unconstitutional maps, right?

 

Fav this tweet.

 

This was so utterly predictable.

Since violence or even an organized militia isn't a desired response, what recourse do we Ohioans and Americans have against corrupt, power-hungry politicians?

 

GOP redistricting commissioners have broken the Ohio Constitution and rule of law

https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2022/05/31/gop-redistricting-commissioners-have-broken-the-ohio-constitution-and-rule-of-law/

3 hours ago, KJP said:

Since violence or even an organized militia isn't a desired response, what recourse do we Ohioans and Americans have against corrupt, power-hungry politicians?

 

GOP redistricting commissioners have broken the Ohio Constitution and rule of law

https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2022/05/31/gop-redistricting-commissioners-have-broken-the-ohio-constitution-and-rule-of-law/

 

This is more of an example of the pitfalls of the initiative process.

 

It's easy to vote for something you don't have to make happen.    

 

So I guess it's also an example of the pitfalls of legislators arbitrary setting rules for private business.

 

The difference being, many and maybe most of them are least aware of how that can be a problem.

 

While the Voting Rights Act does not explicitly protect "majority minority districts", it makes it very tough to get rid of them and pretty much guarantees lawsuits and negative publicity if you try.

 

In practice, good luck holding the Democratic vote under 80% in such a district that is geographically contiguous, let along somewhat based on political divisions.

 

There's a reason the Stokes district came about not because of the VRA, but because W. O. Walker brokered a deal between BEDCO and the Ohio GOP.

Edited May 31, 20223 yr by E Rocc

Gerrymandered Maps Deemed Unconstitutional Have Been Officially Implemented for 2022 Ohio Elections

 

A federal district court, in a 2-1 decision Friday, implemented Ohio state Senate and House district maps for the 2022 election that have twice been declared unconstitutional partisan gerrymanders by the Ohio Supreme Court.

 

Also in a 2-1 decision, in April, the judges representing the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Eastern Division had set May 28 as the deadline for the commission to come up with a viable plan before the federal court would intervene to implement Map 3, which passed along partisan lines by Republicans on the commission in February and has been rejected twice by the state supreme court as unconstitutional. The court issued their ruling May 27 with it taking effect at midnight Saturday.

 

U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Amul R. Thapar and U.S. Western District of Kentucky Judge Benjamin J. Beaton, both appointed by former President Donald Trump, formed the majority. U.S. District Court Southern District of Ohio Chief Judge Algenon L. Marbley, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton, opposed the decision.

...

In his dissent, U.S. District Judge Marbley noted that his previous dissent warned the federal court about signaling it would adopt Map 3 on May 28 as it “set a strong, almost immovable default,” and “virtually ensure[d] that the third map will be used for an August 2 primary.”

 

“Following the majority’s April opinion, the Commission never attempted to craft a constitutionally compliant fifth plan. Two Commissioners, who had participated in all prior rounds of map-drawing, actually ceased their service and appointed substitutes,” Marbley wrote. “If there was any hope of the Commission fulfilling its constitutional duty, this federal panel quashed it.

 

“The majority’s April opinion assured the Commission that if it simply waited another month, the panel would enable it to circumvent the Ohio Supreme Court and realize a map with the desired partisan favoritism. The Commission took the invitation,” he said.

 

Marbley quoted a tweet from Republican Ohio House Majority Leader Bill Seitz written just hours after the federal court’s April opinion which said, “Too bad so sad. We win again. . . . Now I know it’s been a tough night for all you libs. Pour yourself a glass of warm milk and you will sleep better. The game is over and you lost. . . . Turn out the lights. The party’s over. For this 2 year cycle at least.”

 

Full article below:

https://columbusunderground.com/gerrymandered-maps-deemed-unconstitutional-have-been-officially-implemented-for-2022-ohio-elections-ocj1/

 

Criminal Complaint Filed Against Ohio GOP Redistricting Commissioners

 

Democratic state Rep. Jeff Crossman announced last Thursday his filing of a criminal complaint asking the Ohio State Highway Patrol to investigate Republican members of the Ohio Redistricting Commission for dereliction of duty.

...

The language of his allegation is reflective of Ohio Revised Code Section 2921.44, dereliction of duty, subsection (E).

 

“No one is above the law and Republicans shouldn’t get to intentionally break the law and charge us taxpayers an extra $25 million for an extra election we wouldn’t have needed if they did their jobs,” Crossman said in a statement. “If it’s found that they broke the law and failed to follow the Constitution, I’m asking for real accountability.”

 

Named in Crossman’s complaint are Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, Secretary of State Frank LaRose, Auditor Keith Faber, Senate President Matt Huffman and House Speaker Bob Cupp.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/criminal-complaint-filed-against-ohio-gop-redistricting-commissioners-ocj1/

 

2 hours ago, E Rocc said:

 

This is more of an example of the pitfalls of the initiative process.

 

It's easy to vote for something you don't have to make happen.    

 

The Ohio House and Ohio Senate drafted and passed the language for both the state legislative districts and the congressional districts, and the voters approved. These were both legislatively referred constitutional amendments. They should be able to follow the law they created. If they refuse to do so, they should be held in contempt and potentially removed from office for violating their oath to the Ohio Constitution. 

4 hours ago, E Rocc said:

 

This is more of an example of the pitfalls of the initiative process.

 

It's easy to vote for something you don't have to make happen.    

 

So I guess it's also an example of the pitfalls of legislators arbitrary setting rules for private business.

 

The difference being, many and maybe most of them are least aware of how that can be a problem.

 

While the Voting Rights Act does not explicitly protect "majority minority districts", it makes it very tough to get rid of them and pretty much guarantees lawsuits and negative publicity if you try.

 

In practice, good luck holding the Democratic vote under 80% in such a district that is geographically contiguous, let along somewhat based on political divisions.

 

There's a reason the Stokes district came about not because of the VRA, but because W. O. Walker brokered a deal between BEDCO and the Ohio GOP.

 

What are you even going on about? This is about state House and Senate maps, not the Congressional maps.

 

 

It's January 2026..."The Ohio Supreme Court has once again declared the most recent Congressional map invalid, ordering a new map for the 88th time this decade."

Designate an arbitrator and get this sucker done.

53 minutes ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

 

It's January 2026..."The Ohio Supreme Court has once again declared the most recent Congressional map invalid, ordering a new map for the 88th time this decade."

What exactly is the point of the judicial branch if one of the two political parties don't follow their orders?

Ohio Congressional Maps Rejected Again for Partisan Unfairness

 

For the second time, the Ohio Supreme Court rejected a map for congressional districts in the state.

 

The court ruled that the map violated the constitution by favoring one political party over another irrespective of election results across the state.

 

“We hold that the March 2 plan unduly favors the Republican Party and disfavors the Democratic Party in violation of the (Ohio Constitution),” the majority decision reads.

 

The 4-3 decision reflected the other decisions the court has made on redistricting: Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor voted to reject the maps, along with Justice Michael Donnelly, Justice Melody Stewart and Justice Jennifer Brunner. Justices Sharon Kennedy, Patrick DeWine and Patrick Fischer all dissented in the case.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-congressional-maps-rejected-again-for-partisan-unfairness-ocj1/

 

I miss the Ohio of my childhood, when this truly was a moderate state.   

 

State Legislatures Are Torching Democracy

Even in moderate places like Ohio, gerrymandering has let unchecked Republicans pass extremist laws that could never make it through Congress.

 

 

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/08/15/state-legislatures-are-torching-democracy

9 minutes ago, Cleburger said:

I miss the Ohio of my childhood, when this truly was a moderate state.   

 

State Legislatures Are Torching Democracy

Even in moderate places like Ohio, gerrymandering has let unchecked Republicans pass extremist laws that could never make it through Congress.

 

 

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/08/15/state-legislatures-are-torching-democracy

 

The New Yorker Radio Hour last week covered this article and interviewed David Pepper for those who don't have time to read the article. 

 

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/tnyradiohour/segments/jane-mayer-ohio-right

All of the rejections are useless unless they're finally going to hold the Republican members in contempt. 

 

Otherwise, we'll just be doing this same song and dance all the way to 2030.

 

Traitors and criminals carrying out the worst possible crimes on Ohio

 

 

On 8/17/2022 at 1:57 PM, DarkandStormy said:

 

because  the Ohio Supreme court really did not have the power to actually do anything about it. They may not have agreed with the redistricting commission but beyond the giant pissing match that it had devolved into, they really did not have much power to do much about it.  It was like the public school funding decision from 25 years ago. They ruled public school funding in Ohio was unconstitutional, but nothing actually came of it. Same thing here. 

Edited September 12, 20222 yr by Brutus_buckeye

37 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

because  the Ohio Supreme court really did not have the power to actually do anything about it. They may not have agreed with the redistricting commission but beyond the giant pissing match that it had devolved into, they really did not have much power to do much about it.  It was like the public school funding decision from 25 years ago. They ruled public school funding in Ohio was unconstitutional, but nothing actually came of it. Same thing here. 

 

The court doesn't really have to power to do anything about anything.  It relies upon legislatures and executive branches to be willing to submit to it's rulings of what is and isn't lawful.  Clearly that isn't something that can be depended upon when today's Republican Party is in power.

7 minutes ago, X said:

 

The court doesn't really have to power to do anything about anything.  It relies upon legislatures and executive branches to be willing to submit to it's rulings of what is and isn't lawful.  Clearly that isn't something that can be depended upon when today's Republican Party is in power.

The court has a lot of power on numerous matters. It can enjoin, it can throw people in jail, it can do a lot of things. The problem here is their decision is one of those items that crosses from the judicial to legislative and they do not have the power to force the legislature to do something. They can invalidate the law but they do not have the power to force the legislature to come up with a new law that suits their preferences. They cannot tell the legislature or redistricting commission to write the law to conform with the interpretation of Plan A or Plan B. The court cannot decide that matter, which effectively makes their decision political. Their whole problem with the pissing match that occurred over the last year was that the only realistic outcome was the outcome that came from the decision. 

2 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

The court has a lot of power on numerous matters. It can enjoin, it can throw people in jail, it can do a lot of things. The problem here is their decision is one of those items that crosses from the judicial to legislative and they do not have the power to force the legislature to do something. They can invalidate the law but they do not have the power to force the legislature to come up with a new law that suits their preferences. They cannot tell the legislature or redistricting commission to write the law to conform with the interpretation of Plan A or Plan B. The court cannot decide that matter, which effectively makes their decision political. Their whole problem with the pissing match that occurred over the last year was that the only realistic outcome was the outcome that came from the decision. 

The constitutional amendment, passed by the citizens of Ohio gave the Ohio Supreme Court explicit and exclusive jurisdiction to decide whether the maps meet the criteria the voters approved.

 

How is that not having the “power”??

Just now, Enginerd said:

The constitutional amendment, passed by the citizens of Ohio gave the Ohio Supreme Court explicit and exclusive jurisdiction to decide whether the maps meet the criteria the voters approved.

 

How is that not having the “power”??

It is poorly written enforcement clause. They may have the power to decide if they are constitutional, but they do not have the power to actually force the legislature or redistricting commission to comply with the vision that they feel is constitutional. They can order them back to the drawing board, numerous times (which is what happened), but beyond tweaks that were not sufficient to the visions of some members of the court, they really had no other power to force the commission to bend to the court's will which created the stalemate you saw last year. It was pretty much inevitable. 

12 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

The court has a lot of power on numerous matters. It can enjoin, it can throw people in jail, it can do a lot of things. The problem here is their decision is one of those items that crosses from the judicial to legislative and they do not have the power to force the legislature to do something. They can invalidate the law but they do not have the power to force the legislature to come up with a new law that suits their preferences. They cannot tell the legislature or redistricting commission to write the law to conform with the interpretation of Plan A or Plan B. The court cannot decide that matter, which effectively makes their decision political. Their whole problem with the pissing match that occurred over the last year was that the only realistic outcome was the outcome that came from the decision. 

 

The court cannot throw people in jail, law enforcement officials are part of the executive. 

 

If the court can't force the legislature to do anything then who can it enjoin? 

12 minutes ago, Luke_S said:

 

The court cannot throw people in jail, law enforcement officials are part of the executive. 

 

If the court can't force the legislature to do anything then who can it enjoin? 

It can enjoin an unconstitutional law. In this case, it ruled the redistricting unconstitutional. It told the commission to go back and rewrite it. The commission did that. The court did not like it. The commission made tweaks again, the court did not like it in their opinion. The court did not have any power to force the commission to come up with a map that met the court's satisfaction. They could only say no.  All they could do was create a stalemate.

3 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

It can enjoin an unconstitutional law. In this case, it ruled the redistricting unconstitutional. It told the commission to go back and rewrite it. The commission did that. The court did not like it. The commission made tweaks again, the court did not like it in their opinion. The court did not have any power to force the commission to come up with a map that met the court's satisfaction. They could only say no.  All they could do was create a stalemate.

 

The court can say a law is unconstitutional or the application of a law is application of a law is unconstitutional; redistricting being the later case. The court has no enforcement mechanism in either case other than the authority granted by the other two branches respecting the decisions (or as you call them opinions) of the court. This erodes the very basic separation of powers of our government. 

1 minute ago, Luke_S said:

 

The court can say a law is unconstitutional or the application of a law is application of a law is unconstitutional; redistricting being the later case. The court has no enforcement mechanism in either case other than the authority granted by the other two branches respecting the decisions (or as you call them opinions) of the court. This erodes the very basic separation of powers of our government. 

Not really. Remember the court cant legislate hence, they could not make the decision to draw the lines themselves or provide the guidance on what that would look like. That would be legislating by the court. They can only invalidate a law. Hence the stalemate. Both branches are exerting their power to their authority and refusing to back down.

 

Now maybe the executive branch could have broken the tie and sided with the Court but they were likely to side with the legislature given the makeup.  So ultimately, the final artibers on this would be the voters who choose the governor/SOS/etc. 

 

Also, the law was clearly not drafted well. Otherwise, there would have been a better way to resolve the matter

2 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Not really. Remember the court cant legislate hence, they could not make the decision to draw the lines themselves or provide the guidance on what that would look like. That would be legislating by the court. They can only invalidate a law. Hence the stalemate. Both branches are exerting their power to their authority and refusing to back down.

 

Now maybe the executive branch could have broken the tie and sided with the Court but they were likely to side with the legislature given the makeup.  So ultimately, the final artibers on this would be the voters who choose the governor/SOS/etc. 

 

Also, the law was clearly not drafted well. Otherwise, there would have been a better way to resolve the matter

 

Not sure who your debating with at this point... nowhere did I say the court can legislate

Just now, Luke_S said:

 

Not sure who your debating with at this point... nowhere did I say the court can legislate

The only thing I was disputing was that it erodes the separation of powers. I disagree as it created a stalemate. My main point was that if anything, it calls into light the constitutional amendments passed by voters that often are poorly drafted and do not provide adequate mechanisms for resolving such disputes. 

42 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

The only thing I was disputing was that it erodes the separation of powers. I disagree as it created a stalemate. My main point was that if anything, it calls into light the constitutional amendments passed by voters that often are poorly drafted and do not provide adequate mechanisms for resolving such disputes. 

To be fair, this particular amendment was written by the legislature. So maybe that was intended.  

In general, I don't want California style elections where there are a dozen issues on every ballot brought by interest groups that are vague and have far-ranging consequences.

 

On the other hand, the legislature drafted the language under threat that an outside group would draft legislation that was better at solving the problem. So they created a convoluted mess, and now find themselves trying to get obviously illegal maps past a conservative court, and failing. I don't think they planned this route, but they found it a convenient way to maintain power and abdicate their responsibilities for political gain.

Yeah California policy people come up with crappy, poorly-written policy for those referenda. So much crummy policy at state levels. 

Congressional Democrats did better than expected winning 5 seats last night. But with Sharon Kennedy defeating Jennifer Brunner to replace Maureen O'Connor the statehouse Republicans have nothing to stop them from further gerrymandering these maps to favor Republicans. 

 

And with actual voter turnout of these current districts, they have better data to do it too...

57 minutes ago, Luke_S said:

Congressional Democrats did better than expected winning 5 seats last night. But with Sharon Kennedy defeating Jennifer Brunner to replace Maureen O'Connor the statehouse Republicans have nothing to stop them from further gerrymandering these maps to favor Republicans. 

 

And with actual voter turnout of these current districts, they have better data to do it too...

Absolutely imperative that we get a new initiative on the ballot that establishes an independent redistricting commission. Even with the political changes in Ohio over the last few years, I’m confident it would pass easily. It’s just hard to get it on the ballot in the first place. It will likely require two petition drives because of how Ohio law works. 
 

And it is funny that R’s gerrymandered the hell out of the Congressional districts and still lost effectively 1.5 seats, going from a 12-4 delegation to a 10-5 delegation. If Ohio hadn’t used unconstitutional maps, very good chance that we’d be looking at 7 D’s. Might even be a deciding factor in the balance of power in the House 
 

The 1st and 13th are really a silver lining here for democrats. I was thinking this whole time that no matter what happens top ballot at least J.R. Majewski should lose. The 1st and 13th pleasantly surprised me.

Even if the GOP wins the House, it will be by such slim margins that Kevin McCarthy (or whoever ends up Speaker) will have a hell of a time wrangling the Freedom Caucus to vote on anything of substance. Ohio subtracting essentially 2 net GOP House seats might seem insignificant, but it may have prevented the country from going through Biden impeachment nonsense for the next 2 years.

1 hour ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

Absolutely imperative that we get a new initiative on the ballot that establishes an independent redistricting commission

The Fair Vote people better have this ready to fire over to LaRose ASAP. He'll "delay" it as long as he possibly can.

On 11/9/2022 at 9:26 AM, 10albersa said:

The Fair Vote people better have this ready to fire over to LaRose ASAP. He'll "delay" it as long as he possibly can.

FairVote? That's the RCV people and they were not involved with the previous changes. I think you are referring to Common Cause Ohio and/or the League of Women Voters Fair Districts Ohio.

Edited November 10, 20222 yr by Dev

7 hours ago, LlamaLawyer said:

The 1st and 13th are really a silver lining here for democrats. I was thinking this whole time that no matter what happens top ballot at least J.R. Majewski should lose. The 1st and 13th pleasantly surprised me.

It was interesting in the 1st because Landsman underperformed in Hamilton County compared to 2018 an 20 which was supposed to be his strength and overperformed in Warren. for a D+3 district it will be interesting to see if in 2024 that holds true too. Given the results in Warren county, was it a shift because people were tired of Chabot after nearly 30 years? Was it about Jan 6 or has Warren County taken a Blue swing?

This will be interesting to see in future elections. If Mason starts electing Democrats in the next 3-4 years we will have that answer I think. 

 

 

52 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

It was interesting in the 1st because Landsman underperformed in Hamilton County compared to 2018 an 20 which was supposed to be his strength and overperformed in Warren. for a D+3 district it will be interesting to see if in 2024 that holds true too. Given the results in Warren county, was it a shift because people were tired of Chabot after nearly 30 years? Was it about Jan 6 or has Warren County taken a Blue swing?

This will be interesting to see in future elections. If Mason starts electing Democrats in the next 3-4 years we will have that answer I think. 

 

 

 

Pretty sure he did not underperform in Hamilton County. Where did you get that?