Rick Pildes wrote:

In line with Ed Feigenbaum's post-Bandemer factual history, what information do we have about whether aggressive partisan gerrymanders survive at least a second round of re-districting?  If we take the most aggressive gerrymanders of the 1990s, how many of them successfully endured the 2000 round of districting?  I know that Texas did, since the federal-court drawn plan was based on the 1990s district, and in some states, the effect of Shaw will make this difficult to assess.  But any general views on this?  This is a form of O'Connor's question about self-correction, if enduring a decade of manipulation is not itself injury enough.