Search the Roll Call archive by keyword, date, Congress, section, or tags.
↵↵The filings were in response to an appeal from the state Republican Party and Republican state officials, who have asked the justices to set aside a 2-1 lower court decision that allowed the state to
↵↵Earlier this month, a 2-1 majority of a three-judge panel ruled against the challengers, finding the evidence of partisan motivations for the lines was "overwhelming" while evidence of gerrymandering
↵↵The 2-1 decision, written after the judges held a three-day evidentiary hearing, rejected claims that the new congressional lines gerrymandered in favor of the state's Hispanic and Latino communities
A new leader to run the private university would be expected to start July 1 — will they be Trump-friendly, or a fighter?
↵↵Thursday's order faulted a 2-1 panel of lower court judges for stepping in on the "eve" of next year's election to order the Lone Star State to use its prior congressional map from 2021.
↵↵Texas officials have appealed the 2-1 lower court ruling that found the state's map redrawn this year is an illegal racial gerrymander and forced the state to use its prior map drawn in 2021 after the
A statewide exit poll after the 2022 contest found Latino voters supported Democrats by a 2-to-1 margin, a result Democrats are seeking to replicate.
When a 2-1 district court panel agreed last month, it set off the emergency applications to the Supreme Court.
A three-judge panel agreed in a 2-1 decision issued last month. The judges in the majority, David C. Joseph and Robert R. Summerhays, both of the U.S.
Tuesday’s 2-1 decision stops the state from using that new congressional map, finding the changes the state made to comply with the Voting Rights Act instead violated the Equal Protection Clause of the
Hise said the movement of the Black population out of the district represented a less than 1 percentage point change.
The officials also told the justices that the lower court made errors and "ran roughshod over the obvious political explanation for District 1 and the challenged line."
Republican-controlled legislature appealed the case, arguing in one of their briefs to the Supreme Court that the panel "nowhere mentioned other facts demonstrating that politics more readily explains District 1
“The Court finds that race was the predominant factor motivating the General Assembly’s adoption of Congressional District No. 1,” the ruling said.
Voter advocates in the North Carolina case argued that Republicans would likely win 10 or 11 of the state’s 14 newly drawn congressional seats — in a state former President Donald Trump won by 1
In 2012, the first election after the 2010 census redistricting cycle, Democrats won 1 percentage point more of the vote nationally, but Republicans won a 234-seat majority.
The state gained one congressional seat based on the census results, but fell short of getting a second additional seat by 171,000 people, or less than 1 percent of its population.
The state has a June 1 qualification deadline for an Aug. 2 primary election. It’s also unlikely the U.S.
Democrats currently have a 3-to-1 advantage in the House delegation but came within 5 points of losing two of those seats in 2020.
The state has a March 1 primary and already faces half a dozen lawsuits over its new congressional map.