Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Ms. Toad

(38,048 posts)

2. They did NOT ok Texas gerrymander.

Reply to Bobstandard (Original post)

Fri Dec 5, 2025, 01:23 AM

Friday

They determined injunctive (preliminary/interim) relief was not appropriate.

Injunctive relief was always intended to be a rare, interim, remedy - designed solely to prevent irreparable harm until the issue can be fully heard. Lower courts are granting them right and left - so it is not surprising that many are being reversed.

Injunctions are NOT decisions on the merits.

They may well ultimately side with Texas once the case works its way through the courts - but that is not what this decision is about.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Polybius Karma13612

7 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

SCOTUS oks Texas gerrymander. Bets on how they decide on California's? [View all] Bobstandard Friday OP

Major difference, Texans didn't have a say at the ballot box MagickMuffin Friday #1

Absolutely correct, although the SC doesn't take "voters voted for it" into account n/t Polybius Friday #3

They did NOT ok Texas gerrymander. Ms. Toad Friday #2

It's about giving Trump what he wants Bobstandard Friday #4

Legal accuracy is not a nicety. Ms. Toad Yesterday #5

Apparent it is Bobstandard 22 hrs ago #6

The decisions are not inexplicable as to the injunctive relief. Ms. Toad 22 hrs ago #7