Random Observations on John Roberts Buggering Democracy Today

1. The Supreme Court's decision allowing partisan gerrymandering of congressional districts was essentially a nonconsensual buggering of American democracy. By 5-4 vote, the craven conservative cocks, led by Chief Justice John Roberts, said, "Yeah, we don't give a rat's ass. Contort the shit out of districts, state legislatures, to ensure that your party always grabs an unfair number of the state's congressional representatives." Actually, what Roberts said was that the federal courts had no role in deciding it because that would make the court look too political, as if every fucking decision ever made by the Supreme Court isn't considered political (see 5-4 majority comprised solely of craven conservative cocks).

1a. You could bottom line the decision as "¯\_(ツ)_/¯."

2. The actual text of Roberts' opinion was even more confounding. It's like reading a letter from someone explain why he fucked your dog to death by blaming your dog for being too sexy and saying he was doing you a favor. For one, Roberts makes the usual bullshit conservative argument of bringing in the nation's founders. In this case, he says that they didn't have a gerrymandering problem: "The Founders certainly did not think proportional representation was required. For more than 50 years after ratification of the Constitution, many States elected their congressional representatives through at-large or 'general ticket' elections. Such States typically sent single-party delegations to Congress." And then they changed it. You know, whenever tries to read the minds of some rich white guys from 250 years ago, all I can think is "Those motherfuckers owned slaves, treated women as chattel, were drunk most of the time, and shit in a bowl while trying to come up with better ways to murder Indians and take their land. Why the fuck do we still pretend like every word they say applies now?"

3. Even more goddamned aggravating is how Roberts appealed to some illusion of democracy and fairness. He acts like the very notion of the court deciding issues of "fairness" is utterly beyond its scope. After listing several possible versions of "fairness" (only one of which is actually "fair"), he writes, "Even assuming the court knew which version of fairness to be looking for, there are no discernible and manageable standards for deciding whether there has been a violation." How about starting with the fact that the intent was obviously racist. Not for Roberts, though: "Unlike partisan gerrymandering claims, a racial gerrymandering claim does not ask for a fair share of political power and influence, with all the justiciability conundrums that entails. It asks instead for the elimination of a racial classification. A partisan gerrymandering claim cannot ask for the elimination of partisanship." No, but if you're carving out black and Latinx people and isolating them in weird-ass shaped districts to secure Republican seats and limit Democratic seats, that's racist. Roberts doesn't buy that shit, saying that it doesn't matter if there's racism involved as long as you can make a case that it's more partisan than racist: "A permissible intent—securing partisan advantage—does not become constitutionally impermissible, like racial discrimination, when that permissible intent 'predominates.'" As Elana Kagan says in her dissent, you're just fucking saying that one party's votes are more important than another party's and that's really unfair when each person's vote should be equal. And since those party lines are often determined by the number of people from racial groups in them, it's got a racist intent.

3a. And, by the way, one of the two cases here was about the fucked up way that Maryland gerrymanders in favor of Democrats by carving out a white people area. This shit swings both ways, but right now, because Republicans have taken over most state legislatures, it's gonna end up favoring Republicans overall. But demography is destiny and that pendulum can swing back, assholes.

4. To an extent, then, the Court's decision to postpone a final judgment on whether or not to have a citizenship question on the census is useless. If states can just carve up districts like a spastic monkey with box of crayons, what does it matter how many people are in the state? However, of course, the other part of this is that total number of citizens determines total number of representatives per state. And if you get rid of all the non-citizens too afraid to answer and citizens who don't want to answer, then states like New York and California will lose seats and they will go to the shithole states. That's why it's hilarious to see conservatives go nutzoid in anger at Roberts for not giving them every goddamn thing they wanted right now.

4a. I put it at about even odds that Trump just orders that the question be put on the census form and dares anyone to fuckin' stop him. Why wouldn't he? Really, who would stop him?

5. The real winner today is Mitch McConnell. Because of his blank-faced evil and complete lack of ethics, he wiped his ass with Senate tradition and the Constitution and told everyone to sniff it. McConnell has engineered a generational shift in the judicial system of the United States, starting with his theft of the Supreme Court seat that should have been Merrick Garland's. Gotta hand it to him: the man has said that he's a motherfucker, and he brought out a whole bunch of mothers and just fucked them in every hole he could and in a few he made himself. Because that's what motherfuckers do. They fuck mothers. It's right there in the word.

6. And, as ever, the big fucking losers are Democrats, who barely whimpered over the Garland fuckery, who have been able to do little more than sit with their fingers up their asses while Republicans fuck their faces, and who, when they have power, will probably say that it's time to be nice again because bipartisanship or comity or whatever the fuck.

6a. The fact that, so far, the Democratic National Committee has paid so little attention to winning back the Senate demonstrates an utter failure of leadership and imagination. Jesus fuck, if I had a couple of billion dollars, I'd fucking offer to move thousands of people from urban districts to suburban districts in gerrymandered states just to fuck it all up. I'd fight so fucking dirty that Karl Rove would jack off to the Machiavellian shit I would do. Democrats haven't learned that, and until we get this entrenched leadership the fuck out of there, the ones who still flinch when Republicans raise a hand, they just won't.