Supreme Court case Gill versus Whitford. The Supreme Court case Gill v. Whitford pertains to partisan gerrymandering in Wisconsin. The case reached the Supreme Court on appeal when a “federal court upheld the plan as not violating the ‘one person one vote’ principle nor violating the Equal Protection Clause.”
Read or listen to the October 3, 2017 oral arguments for Gill v. Whitford. Pick one of the advocates presenting oral arguments before the Supreme Court in Gill v. Whitford. What arguments do they present in favor of or against redistricting in Wisconsin, measuring gerrymandering, redistricting and the First and Fourteenth Amendments (Equal Protection Clause), one person/one vote, or any other issue that arises in their argument to the Court? How do the Justices respond to the advocates arguments? Are the advocates responses persuasive? Are the Justices responses persuasive?
Pick a couple key arguments from your chosen advocate and the Justices’ responses to those arguments. You do not need to provide a summary of your advocate’s entire argument(s). Instead, focus on a couple of the most important issues that they put forward, what they have to say about them, and how the Justices respond to your chosen advocate.
Supreme Court case Gill v. Whitford: Legal Arguments
Aim to meet the word requirement. Papers that fail to meet the requirement will not receive credit. Your name and any other additional class related information, titles, dates, etc. does not count toward your word count. This does not mean that you can fill the space with nonsense. Your response must thoughtfully address the question and show that you engaged with and understand Gill v. Whitford and the advocates’ arguments. I am not trying to make legal scholars out of you, but I want you to demonstrate your engagement with the material. Also, papers that have horrendous grammar/spelling errors or are generally unreadable will not receive credit.