The crux of the dispute is whether the Legislature created enough majority-minority districts to reflect the state's minority-driven population boom
Send your comments and news tips to email@example.com, click on the article link or click on the "comments" at the bottom of the story
By Nolan Hicks
San Antonio Express-News
Published Nov. 25, 2011
Read the complete story
The majority in the 2-1 vote wrote that the state's lawyers had confused key points of the Voting Rights Act and “misinterpreted” key case law throughout the map-drawing process.
“You have to show irreparable harm, and it's really pretty hard to show irreparable harm in an election,” said Michael Li, an elections law expert who has been closely tracking the redistricting trial. “The state's argument is the same argument that Democrats tried to use in 2004,” which the Supreme Court rejected.
Abbott said he would ask the U.S. Supreme Court for a stay.
Earlier Friday, Abbott slammed changes proposed by the same federal panel to the congressional map in a legal filing, claiming the court overstepped its bounds. Abbott accused it of “undermining the democratic process.”
The panel, which oversaw a key redistricting trial in San Antonio, proposed significant changes to the Legislature's congressional redistricting plan that could give Democrats three more congressional seats and put another three seats in play.