Last year, a district court in San Antonio agreed, finding in two separate rulings that the 2011 and 2013 maps intentionally discriminated by weakening the voting power of black and Latino voters. "Merchants would've been able to steer customers toward cards with lower swipe fees, meaning that AmEx would likely have needed to lower their swipe fees to remain competitive".
A federal magistrate overturned the conviction previous year, but the Wisconsin Department of Justice appealed that decision up to a U.S. Appeals Court, which in a 4-3 ruling found the confession to be voluntary.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday granted Stutzman's petition for review, vacated the Washington court's decision, and remanded her case back to the state court, instructing the court to determine if the state's actions showed the same type of hostility to religion that was found in Masterpiece.
In February of past year, the Washington Supreme Court ruled in favor of the couple, Robert Ingersoll and Curt Freed, and against Baronelle Stutzman (above) of Arlene's Flowers, stating the "case is no more about access to flowers than civil rights cases in the 1960s were about access to sandwiches". Nearly all of the growth came from an increase in black and Hispanic residents, but the new maps produced by the legislature fulfilled its goal of protecting Anglo Republicans, the challengers charged. A Maryland case (Benisek v. Lamone) actually involved an effort to keep the allegedly gerrymandered congressional district in question from being utilized in the November midterms, and the court rejected that bid and sent the rest of it back for further deliberations.
Ken Paxton, the attorney general of Texas, said the decision was a win for Texas.
Argentina v Nigeria: Troost-Ekong speaks ahead of all-important clash
We've seen it in the Champions League though, when things don't go well, he can disappear on the pitch. He wants to show the world a different image to the one we've shown in the first two games'.
In a 5-4 decision, the justices said there isn't enough evidence to prove that state Republicans acted in bad faith and engaged in intentional discrimination when it adopted new maps in 2013 for two congressional districts and several legislative districts. Those maps were challenged and tossed out as unconstitutional, and a three-judge federal court created temporary maps that were used for the 2012 elections. According to court documents, "investigators repeatedly claimed to already know what happened ... and assured Dassey that he had nothing to worry about".
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissent, joined by the three other justices in the liberal wing of the court, that said the decision "selectively parses through the facts" and comes at a serious cost to democracy.
Conservative justice Samuel Alito wrote the opinion for the majority in Monday's ruling. It's a line repeated by many on the right.
Thomas and Gorsuch added they do not believe the Voting Rights Act applies to redistricting.