47.8 F
New York
Thursday, March 28, 2024

The New York Court of Appeals said Democrats Violated the State Constitution and Ignored the Will of the Voters

Related Articles

-Advertisement-

Must read

The New York Court of Appeals said Democrats Violated the State Constitution and Ignored the Will of the Voters

By Gary Tilzer

New York’s highest court has struck down new district lines for Congress and the State Senate drawn up to political advantage by state Democrats with just weeks to go until the June 28 primary elections. The State Court of Appeals will appoint a special master to draw the new districts. “Judicial oversight by the state legislator is required to facilitate the expeditious creation of constitutionally conforming maps for use in the 2022 election and to safeguard the constitutionally protected right of New Yorkers to a fair election,” Chief Judge Janet DiFiore said in a ruling released Wednesday afternoon. The Court of Appeals will appoint a Special master to draw new Congressional and State Senate Districts, instead of the Legislature. The ruling didn’t specify a deadline for the adoption of new maps. But the judges said they were sending the matter to a lower state court, which “shall adopt constitutional maps with all due haste.”

The Court of Appeals wrote: “We are confident that, in consultation with the Board of Elections, [the state] Supreme Court can swiftly develop a schedule to facilitate an August primary election, allowing time for the adoption of new constitutional maps, the dissemination of correct information to voters, the completion of the petitioning process, and compliance with federal voting laws.”

In a sweeping 32-page ruling, a divided New York State Court of Appeals chided Democrats for defying the will of voters who adopted constitutional reforms in 2014 to curb political influence in the redistricting process and create a new outside commission to guide it. The judges additionally found that the congressional districts designed by Democrats were “drawn with impermissible partisan purpose,” violating an explicit state ban on partisan gerrymandering and undercutting the party’s national campaign to brand itself as the champion of voting rights.

“Through the 2014 amendments, the people of this state adopted substantial redistricting reforms aimed at ensuring that the starting point for redistricting legislation would be district lines proffered by a bipartisan commission following significant public participation, thereby ensuring each political party and all interested persons a voice in the composition of those lines,” Chief Judge Janet DiFiore wrote for the four-judge majority.

The Albany Democrats Were Hoisted by Their Own Petard, The 2014 Constitutional Amendment Voters Won

In 2012 after a huge public backlash because of the redistricting lines that favored incumbents, the “three men in the room,” Governor Cuomo, Speaker Silver and Majority Leader Skelos agreed to create an Independent Redistricting Commission, which they immediately fixed, so control would still be in the hands of the elected officials. They got caught by language by language push by good government groups and reformers in the 2014 constitution amendment, which stated: “Districts shall not be drawn to discourage competition or for the purpose of favoring or disfavoring incumbents or other particular candidates or political parties.” The Constitution says that the courts must intervene “as a remedy for a violation of law,” meaning new maps and an August primary.

Sal Albanese Twitter @SalAlbaneseNYC  The gerrymandering decision by NYS Court of Appeals is symptomatic of the broken political system in NY. Both sides of the aisle attempting to fool voters into believing they were creating an “independent” redistricting comm which was anything but. There are true independent models in other States.

The Court of Appeal Judges ruled “lawmakers gerrymandered the congressional maps to Democrats’ favor, in violation of a 2014 constitutional amendment designed to rout out political gamesmanship in redistricting. The State’s Court of Appeals said lawmakers lacked the authority to pass the Congressional and State Senate maps after an Independent Redistricting Commission failed to reach a consensus. The Appeals Court said it will “likely be necessary” to move the Congressional and State Senate primary elections from June to August.” It is not clear if the other primary elections, including Governor and Assembly races will also be moved to August.

Will State Senator Gianaris and Other Leaders of the Democratic Partisan Redistricting Team be Forced to Pay for the Extra Costs if the State Runs A Second Primary?

Deputy Senate Majority Leader Gianaris Railed Against Gerrymandering in 2012 — But Now He’s Leading his Chamber Pushing for Partisan Redistricting:

Sen. Mike Gianaris Twitter @SenGianaris Aug 31, 2011: Gerrymandering throughout the state must be stopped. #keepyourpledge

Senator Gianaris was against gerrymandering before he was for it, now he is leading the aggressive redistricting. Redistricting to Politicians is Like Drugs are to A Junkie They Don’t Care What the Public Sees or Understands. The hypocrite State Senator voted against the 2014 Independent Redistricting Commission, even made a video in 2012 when he was against cutting up communities for political gain. The Democratic Senator from Astoria who killed the Amazon Headquarters deal for Long Island City is being called out for a trail of comments he made a decade ago claiming he opposed gerrymandering of legislative maps to benefit a political party — when Republicans were in control of the State Senate. Gianaris now maintains the new lines are far fairer than the congressional boundaries drawn a decade ago by Republicans in the State Senate (a federal special master drew the last Congressional lines in 2012). Gianaris’ lies that his party did not engage in gerrymandering despite proposing a new congressional map that even the anti-GOP NY Times calls “A ‘Master Class’ in Gerrymandering.” Gianaris’ now legally challenged controversial proposal could cut the number of Republicans in the NY delegation in half, giving Democrats 85% of the congressional districts, despite the party only having 50% of the registered state voters.

Republicans celebrated the decision, which belies Democrats’ many claims that they did not gerrymander the new maps for partisan reasons. “The decision today from the Court of Appeals affirms our position that under One-Party Rule, Albany politicians engaged in obvious partisan gerrymandering, violating the State Constitution,” GOP state Senate Minority Leader Robert Ortt said in a statement. The new maps would have given Democrats an advantage in winning as many as 22 out of the 26 congressional seats that will remain in New York after the 2020 Census reduced the state congressional delegation by one. Even Gianaris’s spokesperson is in hiding after the court’s ruling.

The Jewish Voice Has Warned for Months About the Probability of Democratic Partisan Redistricting in One-Party NY

The Jewish Voice wrote months ago that Albany’s supermajority Democrats would do an end-run around a bipartisan commission empowered by the voters in 2014. On January 10, 2022, the Jewish Voice warned that the so-called Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC) would not reach an agreement on new state and federal redistricting lines. The JV article, “The Kabuki Dance Redistricting Incumbent Protection One-Party NY Fix is In,” predicted that the IRC would not agree on new district maps. The JV reported that new Congressional, Assembly and State Senate maps would be partisan gerrymandered, to limit the number of seats a Republican can win in the state. More importantly, we warned that the level of competency of NY’s government would decrease and the level of corruption with one party drawn districts would increase. The Founding Fathers set up a system of divided government to protect us from our own government. One-party control hurts which works against the founder’s governing principle, hurting our democracy and the ability to meet the people’s needs. In one-party state elected officials gain Orwellian type power of the voters, drawing partisan redistricting maps is just one example. With the breakdown of NYC local media in the last 20-years one-party power has increased to dangerous levels.”

New Yorkers are Clueless How Much the Redistricting Court Battle Effects Them, NY’s Politics and Everyone’s Quality of Life

NY1 Political reporter Nick Reisman framed redistricting as a fight between Democrats and Republicans. The reporter enhanced his limiting political narrative that four less Republican Congressional seats in NY would play a significant role in determining the balance of power in Washington next year. What Reisman did not report on was how the partisan redistricting disenfranchised New York voters who voted for a State Constitution Amendment that required independent redistricting. It is not only NY1 that spun the redistricting story to a partisan battle, most of the media limited discussion to the point that most New Yorkers have no idea of the real stakes and consequences of the court battle.

Redistricting is not about giving the Republican Party that does not exist in most of the city power, it is about taking power away from voters, even in Democratic Districts to help incumbents. The goal of redistricting, especially in one-party NY, should be to give the voters of every district influence on their elected officials. The goal of redistricting is to have the representative serve the particular needs of his or her community, which is impossible if the elected officials district cuts through several neighborhoods with unique needs. The high reelection rates caused by the gerrymandering of districts done by partisan and incumbent protection map makers, allow elected officials to avoid problems like affordable housing, homelessness, and bad schools. It would teach Albany a lesson and go a long way to fixing the city by holding elected officials responsible if the judges appoint a special master to redraw the districts to keep neighborhoods together and ignore the current incumbent protection lines.

The Daily News Editorial Sent Two Messages to the State’s Chief Judge to “Do the Right Thing” Rule on the State Constitution

NY Daily News “Chief Judge Janet DiFiore, who was elected a county court judge and then Westchester district attorney as a Republican and then switched parties to be a Democrat before being elevated to the Court of Appeals, knows politics well. But in this case, there can be no loyalty to the party, for finding in favor of the Democrats would fly in the face of the very Constitution DiFiore and her six colleagues are sworn to uphold and protect. But the only way that DiFiore can uphold her honor and her oath is to compare the unambiguous language of the Constitution, as ratified by millions of New Yorkers, with the dreck that the Democratic supermajority produced. Tossing these lines and ordering new ones from a special master and pushing back the primary from June to August is the one true, fair, and just outcome. And since the state Independent Redistricting Commission also failed to follow the Constitution, the maps for the state Senate and Assembly must also be redone. Next year, the judiciary is up for a raise; DiFiore doesn’t want to fight with the Legislature, which can block that raise. That can’t factor into her decision, nor can any other consideration. This is about the Constitution and the lines, and it’s clear as day.”

The NY Times Was the Only Paper Not to Write an Editorial to Send a Message to the Court of Appeal to Follow the Constitution

In 1982, when the Brooklyn Democrat Machine used their judges to take a primary win away from Major R. Owens. The NY Times wrote an Op-Ed by Sydney H. Schanberg, “Stealing an Election” on Saturday, two days before the Court of Appeals would reverse the lower court’s ruling.

NY Times 1982 “Someone is trying to steal an election in Brooklyn and so far, they’re getting away with it. The judge who issued the initial ruling in the case was either confused or something worse; he abdicated all responsibility for determining which side was to blame for the voting irregularities and he chose to ignore crucial evidence that would have helped him reach such a finding. Instead, he threw out the results and ordered a new election for next Tuesday, which benefits the loser in the original vote, Vander L. Beatty, the man to whom the evidence seems to point. Mr. Beatty, a State Senator, was beaten in the Sept. 23 primary by Major R. Owens, also a State Senator, for the Democratic nomination to the House of Representatives from the 12th Congressional District, an important Black District in the Bedford-Stuyvesant area of Brooklyn. The margin was 2,879 votes out of 33,927 cast.”

In 2014, A NY Times Editorial Wrote the Independent Redistricting Amendment Would Be Abused. When It Was Abused This Year Their Editorial Paged Remained Silent

The NY Times wrote in an editorial on 10/28/14 that voters should defeat the Independent Redistricting Commission Amendment but has not written any editorial opinion on Judge McAllister and Court of Appeals rulings that the 2022 Congressional district maps were unconstitutional. NY Times 2014 wrote “Proposal One is a constitutional amendment to revise the state’s redistricting procedure. This is a phony reform that purports to establish a new system of drawing legislative districts. Legislative leaders would appoint a committee charged with drawing new districts. If the legislators do not like the first two tries, they can draw the districts themselves. The net result would be to reinforce, not reform, a system that virtually guarantees job security for incumbents and discourages competition. Vote no on Proposal One.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

balance of natureDonate

Latest article

- Advertisement -