Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, January 17, 2018

Adam Liptak, New York Times: In October, when the Supreme Court heard arguments in a case that could reshape American politics, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. registered an objection. There was math in the case, he said, and it was complicated. "It may be simply my educational background," the chief justice said, presumably referring to his Harvard degrees in history and law. But he said that statistical evidence said to show that Wisconsin's voting districts had been warped by political gerrymandering struck him as "sociological gobbledygook." Last week, Judge James A. Wynn Jr. came to the defense of math. "It makes no sense for courts to close their eyes to new scientific or statistical methods," he wrote in a decision striking down North Carolina's congressional map as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

"The Constitution does not require the federal courts to act like Galileo's Inquisition and enjoin consideration of new academic theories," Judge Wynn wrote.

"That is not what the founding generation did when it adopted a Constitution grounded in the then-untested political theories of Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau," he wrote. "That is not what the Supreme Court did when it recognized that advances in our understanding of psychology had proven that separate could not be equal."

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Rs only believe math and science when they confirm preconceived notions.

#1 | Posted by SomebodyElse at 2018-01-17 11:15 AM | Reply

Republicans only believe in fairness when it favors them. Fairness is not a value that they consider important. One man, one vote is "sociological gobbledygook." Justice Roberts is a corporate shill owned and operated by the GOP, Inc.

#2 | Posted by danni at 2018-01-17 11:29 AM | Reply

And the DNC does not believe in fairness at all. How does that feel ddan?

#3 | Posted by Sniper at 2018-01-17 11:39 AM | Reply

What would that solve? The side who did the math and presented the results would be demonized as spreading lies and fake news by the other side. If both sides do the math and present the results in a bipartisan manner, then no one would believe it and demonize both sides. Seriously, is this all the Dems have to offer are suggestions on how to keep the status quo in our political system?

#4 | Posted by humtake at 2018-01-17 11:42 AM | Reply

"The side who did the math and presented the results would be demonized as spreading lies and fake news by the other side. If both sides do the math and present the results in a bipartisan manner, then no one would believe it"

So...your answer is..."it's impossible"...?!?

America's "Cant' Do" spirit in action? (...or is that inaction?)

#5 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-01-17 11:45 AM | Reply

It's rather sad that our Chief Justice is so partisan he views mathematics as being suspiciously against him.

#6 | Posted by jpw at 2018-01-17 01:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Justice Breyer, "And can we say that without going into what I agree is pretty good gobbledygook?"

#7 | Posted by et_al at 2018-01-17 02:57 PM | Reply

Without math there could be no vote count. The computer, loaded with voting data by district uses math to create any desired result. That is what gerry-mandering does. Is Roberts stupid, or just doesn't care and is testing excuses? Roberts partisan agenda was demonstrated irrevocably in 2000 with a majority opinion designed specifically for the benefit of one man in such a way that a Democrat could never use it. Another pathetic excuse for a judge, yet in charge of the whole system.

Nothing matters but control by Republicans and profits for the 1%. Roberts behavior and inability to think clearly is consistent with a nation in decline.

#8 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-01-17 03:08 PM | Reply

Roberts partisan agenda was demonstrated irrevocably in 2000 with a majority opinion designed specifically for the benefit of one man

Roberts wasn't even a judge in 2000.

#9 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-17 03:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

oops, I screwed up

#10 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-01-17 03:18 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

9

That's awesome....funny.

#11 | Posted by eberly at 2018-01-17 03:30 PM | Reply

oops, I screwed up

#10 | POSTED BY BAYVIKING

No worries. We all make mistakes.

#12 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-17 03:39 PM | Reply

We all make mistakes.
#12 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Speak for yourself, arbiter.

#13 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-01-17 03:41 PM | Reply

If settlement patterns, democrats concentrating in urban areas, create an "efficiency gap" should the state be obligated to create odd, squiggle-shaped districts to fix the math? Wisconsin has mostly regular compact shaped districts. Illinois has shapes more traditionally associated with gerrymandering.

#14 | Posted by RegularJoe at 2018-01-17 04:36 PM | Reply

"The facts have a well-known liberal bias."
Rob Corddry

#15 | Posted by SomebodyElse at 2018-01-18 12:21 PM | Reply

So...your answer is..."it's impossible"...?!?
America's "Cant' Do" spirit in action? (...or is that inaction?)

#5 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

That's always their answer for everything.

Healthcare
Gun violence
Poverty
Bottom line is they don't believe in government or governing because they don't accept that there is such a thing as a society to which we all have a responsibility. They clearly don't believe in a government of "we the people" or "general welfare" or anything that can "tell them what to do". They are anarchists. They can't relate to responsibility beyond their immediate family and/or friends.

These things are possible everywhere else in the world except in the US.

The thing that kills me is that there are more of us than there are of them. But they vote because they can be stampeded by their fears and the Republican party is more than willing to supply the prerequisite fears: gay marriage, "illegals", gun "confiscation", abortion and we don't. Actually our side has more to fear: the loss of our democracy. But for some reason, we aren't panicked enough to do what is necessary to prevent it.

#16 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2018-01-18 02:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort