Now, as part of the presentation of new congressional district maps drawn as a result of a continuing federal trial in
, all sides were given the opportunity to submit comments before yesterday. In and among the comments filed before the deadline was this choice gem filed by the state:“Showed no deference?” Deference? Washington, DC
Because the Court changed all 36 congressional districts, it is clear that the Court has showed no deference to the congressional redistricting plan enacted by the
Now I know the meaning of that word, but perhaps someone needs reminding what the word deference actually means. Here is one definition: “respectful submission or yielding to the judgment, opinion, will, etc., of another.”
In among those words are these: respectful, judgment and opinion.
That is being respectful of the judgment and opinion of the Texas Legislature. An opinion, and a judgment that because of how they drew these district maps up, is beneath the respect of everyone.
Really and truly? The state is critical of how the 3-judge panel, two of them being Republican appointees, redrew the congressional district maps because they got no respect?
That’s kind of the idea, you know.
But I’m willing to cut the judges some slack and say that probably not all of the district boundaries needed to be redrawn, but because others definitely had problems, when you move a boundary in one district because it is unfairly drawn, that means that this same boundary that is shared by a neighboring district also has to move, even it there is no good reason to move it.
It’s either that, or the congressional district map was so poorly and unfairly drawn that it actually required that all 36 districts’ boundaries to be adjusted. That is, the state just proved the plaintiff’s case.