But this WaPo piece on
why Dems probably aren't going to pull DeLay-style mid-decade redistricting shenanigans doesn't make it sound that way. In no particular order, it sounds like Dems aren't going to do it because either they don't have sufficient control in most states, or it would look bad politically.
In other words, the story seems to say, if Dems controlled more state legislatures and cared as little about public opinion as Republicants, they'd happily gerrymander the political process into oblivion too.
ETA: And then there's
this op-ed full of encouragement:[O]ne thing emerges clearly: The Supreme Court will do nothing to rein in even the worst excesses of partisan gerrymandering.
The court's opinion does not say this in so many words. Indeed . . . it once again formally leaves open the question of whether any gerrymander could be bad enough to warrant judicial intervention. But if Texas's case is not bad enough, then the one that is can exist only in some place other than the real world.
Are bedrock principles, commitment to the democratic process, and respect for the rule of law nothing more than liabilities in today's political climate? Discuss.