PA GOP Statement on Congressional Map Ruling by PA Supreme Court


HARRISBURG — Today, Pennsylvania GOP Chairman Val DiGiorgio released the following statement on the congressional map ruling made by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court:

“The Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s politically motivated decision is a partisan attempt to overturn the will of the legislature, which approved these congressional maps with Democrat votes in 2011. Back in 2010, this same court said these district lines were constitutional — the only things that have changed between then and now are makeup of the court and Democrats being dissatisfied with the results.

“This decision by judicial activists contradicts two-hundred years of precedent along with the findings of their own fact-finder, Judge Brobson. By legislating from the bench, Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court is throwing our elections into chaos and confusion. We intend to support efforts to secure a stay from the United States Supreme Court, similar to the recent stay granted in North Carolina.”

— Val DiGiorgio, Chairman, Republican Party of Pennsylvania


23 thoughts on “PA GOP Statement on Congressional Map Ruling by PA Supreme Court

  1. I defy any person to draw up districts with the required populations in each and every district and do it without it looking like it hasn’t been gerrymandered. Square blocks of various sizes is completely impossible. Ideally, blocks/districts would would be based on 2 criteria, population and political registration with as near as 50/50 dem to rep representation. So again, how do you make the districts around the large cities in Pennsylvania that have a huge disparity of dems to reps and make it more fair to reps??? If I’m on the court that is how I would be inclined to order it be done and if you want to see a weird map that more resembles a fractal, try doing a map of districts that way. Not sure of the number, I recall something like 710,000 people per district. When the map is being created and you have a district up around say 660,000 people and you need to start pulling another 50,000 from adjacent counties it can get pretty weird looking. Even weider looking when you move to the counties you took people from to come up with 710,000 in the district you just completed and now you have several districts that are way short of the required number and you have to pull from counties adjacent from them. If you’ve been using your imagination creating this map along these lines you can see the potential problems trying to have districts with equal populations much less never having attempted to make the districts politically “fair”. I DO NOT want to be called upon to help draw up the districts. The PA supreme court, for lack of a better term, is full of SHIT.

  2. A good example of gerrymandering is the 14th congressional district. It weaves and bobs…of course, that’s OK, since it’s held by the Dems. If GOP complained about it, they would be called whiners…

  3. Dems are running scared; they never expected PA to flip red in 16. They lost the first suit on this in front of the federal circuit court, so they took it to a stacked PA Supreme Court, which obliged them. Now, off to SCOTUS we go, at the expense of the PA taxpayer. That’s what Dems do best, waste other people’s money.

  4. One final thought on this: Since this is the 3rd case of the same type (NC, PA, Wisc.) going to SCOTUS, it appears to be a concerted effort to fight MAGA voters.

  5. It likely won’t be taken by scouts. It’s a state matter not federal. Thus state courts. The supreme court lacks jurisdiction, gop will likely lose 2 to 5 seats especially as the suburban areas hate trump and they can’t appeal to SCOTUS for a stay

  6. It applies to Federal election and therefore SCOTUS has jurisdiction. And the Pa Supreme Court ruling has the court assuming powers specifically granted to the State legislature by the US Constitution.

  7. It isn’t concerning powers granted by the constitution. The case was concerning the PA Constitution which more broadly protects the right to one person one vote which was violated by extreme gerrymandering. The SCOTUS doesent take cases that are based on state constitutions

  8. I understand what the case was about, but it pertains to a federal election. Also, the remedy proposed states the court will draw the boundaries if the legislature doesn’t in a time frame artificially imposed by the court. In fact an outrageously short period.

  9. “Politically motivated”! Really?? That’s exactly why the Republican majority in the legislature were guilty of when these maps were drawn. The original maps in 2010 were SO partisan that they were thrown out. This mess is what we ended up with, but just as partisan as the first maps. This is voter supression, and the people in Chester County deserve better. It’s about time that the maps in PA were drawn in a non partisan way. What are the Republican’s afraid of?

  10. The timeframe is somewhat shor ill give you that, but its good to get non partisan maps that voters want as soon as possible with elections approaching rapidly, and just because it pertains to a federal election does not mean that a federal court can interfere so long as the case was based upon state specific law and not federal law. Anyway, the court eill draw the map anyway, ghe GOP legislagure will be dimb and try to draw another gerrymander (if theyre smart theyll make a deal with wolf – 2 extra dem seats if he wont veto) wolf will veto and the court will draw the map

  11. Actually I believe you are,there are several variations already drawn up including one by a piano teacher. Why y’all afraid of Democracy aren’t you Americans?

  12. YOu guys have been subverting the will of the voters for years with your ridiculously drawn maps… there is no way in hell that 13 R’s and 5 D’s always win in the US Congress when the majority of Pennsylvanians are Democrat. Agree to the non-partisan commission proposed by the two bills in the Assembly, and stop trying to defend the indefensible, the Congressional map of 2011 when R’s controlled the process, and had the elected pick their voters.

  13. The state legislature does indeed have the power to set the places, manners and times of elections.

    Nothing in the Constitution states that this power is unlimited, and that the people of the state cannot sue through their courts if they feel the manner in which the state has chosen to execute its elections leaves them unfairly represented.

    That’s what the courts are for.

  14. Which is why we should adopt the non-partisan commission, for which there are two bills in the Assembly right now.

    This court ruling happened to affect maps drawn by a GOP-dominated legislature, but no one is saying if the Dems were in power in the legislature, they would be above gerrymandering.

    This is why we should not give them the power to do so.

    Get it back to where you choose your representatives instead of them choosing you.

    And what’s wrong with that?

  15. I don’t blame the Democrats. Blaming the Democrats for winning power by any means necessary is like blaming a dog for digging in the trash—that’s what they do. My issue is with an incompetent leadership. I saw this coming three years ago and started making calls to any legislature or state senator who would listen. We had zero strategy for the state supreme court knowing that redistricting would come up. All we have to do is go to every gun Shop and hunting club in the state and present a list of of legislative hit jobs on the gun rights in blue States. Then you go to the farming communities all across the state of Pennsylvania and you highlight the fact that California Illinois New York and other blue states are destroying their Dairy Industries. Then you show the idiotic regulation in blue States it drives jobs away and makes ordinary people criminals. The entire leadership of the state of Pennsylvania Republican party needs to step down–you have no vision, no strategic ability to fight and in my opinion you’re Rino Republicans. You should all resign.

  16. I agree. The courts are there to redress wrongs. However, they can not usurp the power specifically assigned to the legislature. The remedy offered does that exactly. Imposing an unachieveable deadline for the legislature the court will draw its own boundaries?

  17. so true. “Citizens Alliance of Pa” wrote what you noted, and added that it is clear the Dems waited until they had the supremes to attempt this which is just as bad. CAP has also noted that once a politician goes to harrisburg R or D, they become one – job number 1 is to stay in office. :(

  18. We are a Representative Republic. Democracy is anti-American, anti-constitutional, and a repeatedly proven failure of an ideology. Evolve dammit!

  19. Damn dude ,you don’t even understand a Rep Republic is a Democracy and you’re telling me to evolve.You can’t make this stuff up.It is not a repeatedly proven failure WTH are you talking about? Let me guess you are parroting some asinine article written by someone who graduated from Rice with a science degree. You are an American and you don’t know we live in a Democracy? You are anti-American and ill informed.

  20. I’m not parroting anyone. You don’t know that a democracy is mob rule of one vote per person and a representative republic gives authority to a single representative to vote on their behalf? You should re-read history.

  21. Took you all that time to come back with BS? You mean political science not history don’t you ? The United States is a Democracy . The United States is a Republic . You gave yourself away with the mob rule comment -parrot.

  22. No. I mean history. I only read back through comments once in a while, if ever. Is commenting your job? Don’t you have a life?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.