Texas incongruities

Scotusblog has this post dealing with the 5 redrawn Texas congressional districts on the heels of SCOTUS's 2006 decision on the Texas redistricting, where although the plan won overall, a single district, the 23rd, was found unconstitutional by the Court. The District court, on remand, has changed five districts to make the 23rd "legal". The Court has done this a mere 90 days out of an election, changing the election dynamics in such a way as to harm all the candidates in these 5 districts.

The Constitution leaves it to the States to decide the manner of election, yet a Federal court has stepped in and drawn a map of its own, rather than that chosen by the elected members of the Texas Legislature.

Earlier this week, a Federal Court ruled that the State cannot define its elections, declaring that the State GOP had no proof that Tom DeLay would not be a resident of the state on Election day, even though he provided a Virginia drivers' license, employment forms bearing a Virginia address, and other documents proving a Virginia Residency. Texas state law allows the party to "declare ineligible" any candidate that is not a resident per public record. (To the federal court, a Drivers' license is not a public record now) Although the Texas GOP has said it will appeal it to SCOTUS, as noted in this post on Scotusblog from Thursday, August 3rd. The 5th circuit opinion can be found here (ht: Scotusblog)

The panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals reasoned that the Democrats suffered actual harm in having to change their election strategy to run against someone other than DeLay, who resigned from Congress in June, and publically announced his moving to Virginia. This is at odds with the redrawn map adopted by the District Court, where that "actual harm" is akin to what the Democrats had claimed in the DeLay case.

Coincidence? Where at once both decisions are in sync, but are also at odds with each other? Not a chance.

The DeLay decision stands in stark contrast to the Torch - where AFTER the mandated deadline, Sen. Robert Toricelli withdrew from the race, and was replaced on the Ballot by former Sen. Frank Lautenberg. The Court in NJ saw fit to ignore the ballot rules, on a matter of "fairness" that the voters be left with a choice.

DeLay may be forced to run for (re)election this November, and given the meddling of the courts, the chances of DeLay winning have likely improved. The Democrats may get what they want - DeLay on the ballot - but still lose big.