Here’s How the 2020 Candidates Reacted to Today’s Supreme Court Ruling on Gerrymandering

The presidential hopefuls weighed in on Twitter about gerrymandering.

Aurora Samperio/Zuma

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

The Supreme Court issued a ruling Thursday finding that partisan gerrymandering can’t be blocked by federal courts, effectively allowing state legislatures to draw district lines in such a way as to disadvantage either political party. On Twitter, the 2020 Democratic hopefuls pounced on the opportunity to weigh in.

Several candidates, including New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and Washington Governor Jay Inslee, called gerrymandering a “disgrace.”

Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren called the decision “an abomination.”

Still other candidates pointed out that gerrymandering can be used to weaken the voting power of communities of color.

New Jersey Senator Cory Booker promised a new Voting Rights Act to remove barriers to voting access.

Texas Representative Beto O’Rourke also unveiled a plan to strengthen voting rights.

Others made broader statements about the harmful consequences of the Supreme Court’s decision.

 

 

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate