Quote:

---

The state of Texas has a pretty amusing response to Attorney General Eric Holder's claims that the state's redistricting plans discriminate against minority voters:

Quote:

---

DOJ’s accusations of racial discrimination are baseless. In 2011, both houses of the Texas Legislature were controlled by large Republican majorities, and their redistricting decisions were designed to increase the Republican Party’s electoral prospects at the expense of the Democrats. It is perfectly constitutional for a Republican-controlled legislature to make partisan districting decisions, even if there are incidental effects on minority voters who support Democratic candidates. http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Texas-reply-o
n-Sec.-3-of-VRA-8-5-13.pdf]

---

Election law expert Rick Hasen posted this paragraph from Texas' 54-page response filed in Texas federal court on his blog with the comment "Only in America." http://www.businessinsider.com/texas-responds-to-eric-holders-lawsuit-
2013-8]

---

Quote:

---

Even if violations occurred, they bear no resemblance to the “pervasive,” “flagrant,” “widespread,” and “rampant” discrimination that originally justified preclearance in 1965. See Shelby County, 133 S.Ct at 2629. Under Shelby County, bail-in could be a congruent and proportional remedy for intentional discrimination, but only in response to the kind ofever-changing discriminatory machinations that gave rise to the preclearance regime in the first place. Because nothing remotely like that has occurred in modern-day Texas, this Court cannot impose preclearance on Texas while remaining faithful to Shelby County and the constitutional principles on which it relies.” http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Texas-reply-o
n-Sec.-3-of-VRA-8-5-13.pdf, p. 11

---