Outside the Beltway

Institutional reform is necessary, but we can’t accomplish much in the face of tribalism.

Ok, so what should change?

The convergence of design flaws in the constitution and a flawed leader have brought us to brink of an electoral crisis.

It creates a veto gate that they are almost guaranteed to control when they need it.

The evidence is clear. Injustice feeds rage and rage sometimes boils over.

The Republicans are playing a different game.

The Supreme Court returns to work today with a significant number of high-profile cases on its docket.

But, our process to elect the president is highly flawed.

The Trump Administration has informed Federal District Court Judges in Maryland and New York that it intends to still try to justify putting a citizenship question on the 2020 Census.

Change isn’t likely.

In a clear defeat for the Trump Administration, the Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling that the Federal Government could not ask about citizenship on the 2020 Census.

In a significant setback for challenges to partisan gerrymandering, the Supreme Court has effectively ruled that Federal Courts do not have jurisdiction to hear challenges to redistricting based on partisan motivations.

Democrats clashed, to some degree, in last night’s inaugural debate of the 2020 season but they clearly agreed far more than they disagreed.

The Supreme Court rejected an effort by the Virginia House of Delegates to overturn a Federal Court ruling that the state’s district lines constituted gerrymandering by race. But they didn’t rule on the merits of the appeal.

As the Supreme Court enters the final weeks of its term, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg hints at deep divisions and disappointment for people on the left.

Starting tomorrow, we should be getting some headline-grabbing opinions from the Supreme Court.

Despite similar paths to the Supreme Court, it turns out the two don’t share the same style and approach.

A panel of three Federal Judges has found Ohio’s Congressional District map to be unconstitutional, but a case currently pending before the Supreme Court could mute the impact of this decision.

A Federal Court in Michigan has found several of that state’s Congressional and state legislative districts to have been subject to extreme partisan gerrymandering.

Six weeks is a very long time in American politics.

Oral argument hints that we may have a 5-4 ruling allowing state legislatures to continue stacking the deck.

The former Attorney General is seriously pondering a presidential bid. Seriously.

Former Astronaut Mark Kelly, the husband of Gabby Giffords, is running for Senate in Arizona against Martha McSally.

The Supreme Court is taking up the issue of partisan gerrymandering. This time, though, they’re likely to reach the merits of the cases rather than punting like they did last year.

The latest entry in the unity third party presidential candidate genre is just as bad as they always are.

After a barrage of criticism, New Jersey Democrats are abandoning a controversial redistricting proposal.

An argument against “bothersiderism” in this case and, yet again, noting the problem with single seat districts.

On the way out the door, Scott Walker signed a bill to take powers away from his successor (and demonstrated a lack of understanding of Venn diagrams).

Gerrymandering. It’s not just for Republicans.

Current attempts to take power away from the state executive branch illustrates a lot of what I have been writing about for years.

Some examples from 2018 of the problems with single seat districts.

Once again, Republicans in California find themselves looking up and seeing a lot of desolation. They need to find a way to bounce back.

The NYT is trying to start a conversation.

With most forecasts assuming that Republicans will at least lose control of the House, the odds are that the GOP will react to that by moving further to the right.

Bret Stephens’ piece this week adds up to not much.

While I was originally content to let Brett Kavanaugh sail through to confirmation, I now feel compelled to oppose his nomination to be a Supreme Court Justice.

For the second time in two years, the Supreme Court starts a new term down one Justice. That isn’t as big a problem as it might seem.

A Federal Court has ruled that North Carolina can use its current Congressional District map for this year’s midterms notwithstanding a ruling that it is an impermissible gerrymander.

For the second time this year, a three-judge panel of Federal Judges has struck down North Carolina’s Congressional District map. The immediate question is what impact, if any, this will have on November’s election.

With just 72 days to go until Election Day, the chances that the Democrats will take control of at least one chamber of Congress are looking quite good.

A group of lawsuits filed across the country are seeking to challenge the predominant method for allocation of Electoral College votes. These lawsuits appear to have little merit.

Forget the “republic v. a democracy” abstraction. The numbers show some serious flaws in translating popular will into government.

There is a frustration and a growing sense that the American political system is illegitimate.

Progressive enthusiasm for the notion that our governing framework is dynamic and ought be constantly updated by the judiciary is waning.

The Supreme Court term began with hopes that the Justices would shake up the redistricting process with rulings against partisan gerrymandering. It has ended with three whimpers.

The Supreme Court has largely rejected a challenge to state and Federal redistricting maps in the State of Texas.

The Supreme Court avoided ruling on the merits of two partisan gerrymandering cases, but the issue will be back before them sooner rather than later.

A 9-0 ruling side-stepped the broader issue of to what extent purely political considerations may be applied.

With two more weeks to go, there are plenty of “big” cases still awaiting the release of a decision.

It isn’t a primary and it is an illustration of how electoral rules affect behavior.