[EL] ruling in TX state house redistricting challenge

[Rick Hasen]

From: Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu>
Date: Thursday, April 20, 2017 at 2:38 PM
To: Edward Still <still at votelaw.com>
Subject: Re: [EL] ruling in TX state house redistricting challenge

At the very least, the intentional discrimination findings are relevant for SEction 3 bail in.

Rick Hasen
Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse typos.
________________________________
From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu <law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> on behalf of Edward Still <still at votelaw.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 2:00:15 PM
Cc: Election Law
Subject: Re: [EL] ruling in TX state house redistricting challenge

I don't understand why the 3-judge court  is spending time on the 2011 plan which has modified/replaced by a 2013 plan. Can someone explain that?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20170420/0e1e1174/attachment.html>