I have no quarrel with what you present here. Texas is a really strange case as you point out and the Court did act against a racial gerrymander as part of the ruling. My point was more peripheral and had mostly to do with the language Justice Alito used in his opinion; not so much the decision itself. My concern is if applied more broadly by persons of ill-intent, the concepts that “because a voter’s race sometimes correlates closely with political party preference…it may be very difficult for a court to determine whether a districting decision was based on race or party preference”, coupled with presuming good faith by legislators in what seems like all cases, and putting the burden on plaintiffs to prove ill-intent (vs. simply proving a discriminatory impact), may have instructional value as to how to wriggle around without running afoul of the law.
With that said, with your permission, I’d like to publish your comments as part of a follow-up…I’d like to say Friday and that’s what I’ll aim for barring unforeseen craziness. Let me know if this is OK with you.