WUWM talks with Rick Esenberg on the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Gill v. Whitford, Wisconsin's legislative redistricting case.
Justices ruled that the plaintiffs were trying to show that the maps violate the rights of all state voters – instead of showing how the maps affect them ...
Rick Esenberg writing at RealClearPolitics on why the U.S. Supreme Court punted on Wisconsin's redistricting case, Gill v. Whitford:
In the eagerly awaited redistricting case, Gill v. Whitford, the United States Supreme Court vacated a lower court ruling directing the Wisconsin legislature to ...
Court may have punted, but have pinned plaintiffs deep inside their own territory
June 18, 2018 – Milwaukee, WI – Today, the United States Supreme Court issued a much-anticipated decision in Gill v. Whitford , a challenge to Wisconsin's legislative maps. In reaction, Rick Esenberg, ...
Brief supports appellants’ argument that the maps meet constitutional requirements and that there is no law-based, workable standard for separating permissible maps from impermissible maps in claims of political gerrymandering, particularly where, as in Wisconsin, traditional redistricting ...
Brief supports appellants’ argument that the maps meet constitutional requirements and that there is no law-based, workable standard for separating permissible maps from impermissible maps in claims of political gerrymandering, particularly where, as in Wisconsin, traditional redistricting ...
Confident that SCOTUS will decline to insert judiciary into political questions
June 19, 2017 – Milwaukee, WI – Today, in a highly significant development, the United States Supreme Court has decided to hear Gill v. Whitford, the long running challenge to Wisconsin’s legislative maps. The ...
No results found.