Mediaboss Marketing

While some have called for a U.S. population of one billion and many continue to push for an ever-increasing national population without specifying an upper limit, others are recommending a gradual stabilization of Americas population.

America currently has 333 million citizens: triple the number from a century ago. The U.S. population is currently the worlds third-largest after China at 1.44 billion and India at 1.39 billion.

Although the U.S. population is expected to increase to 400 million around mid-century, Nigeria is projected to overtake it by that time. In addition, Nigeria is expected to remain third throughout the 21st century, with America being in fourth place followed closely by Pakistan.

Basically, there are two ways for America to increase its population size. One is through higher fertility rates that would result in substantially more births than deaths. The second is to increase the current levels of immigration to the U.S.

Regarding the fertility rate, in 2020, America was approximately one-half of a child below the replacement level, or, 1.64 births per woman. Although that fertility rate is a record low for America, it is similar to the levels of most developed countries and many developing countries.

Also, the U.S. fertility rate has been on a downward trend over the past 60 years and today is less than half the rate it was in 1960. Given this trend and the family size preferences of U.S. couples, Americas fertility rate is unlikely to reach the replacement level any time soon, despite calls for more American babies and fear-mongering about an imminent U.S. population collapse.

Consequently, if Americas population is to grow in the future, as many are advocating, it will need to rely on immigration. If immigration were to stop, Americas population is projected to remain basically unchanged by mid-century and nearly 10 percent smaller, or 301 million, by the close of the 21st century.

However, with a net immigration level of about 1.1 million annually per the U.S. Census Bureaus main series projection, Americas population, despite its below-replacement fertility rate, continues to increase and is expected to reach 405 million by 2060.

A higher level of net immigration to America than what is currently being assumed seems likely, especially given todays high levels of illegal migration. In the fiscal year 2021, more unauthorized migrants, nearly 1.7 million, were apprehended than in all previous years. Also, the current catch and release policy is contributing to the more than 11 million unauthorized migrants now living in the country.

For Americas population to reach close to one billion by mid-century, it would require a tenfold increase in the number of immigrants assumed in the Census Bureau projections. This would mean a net immigration flow of more than 10 million migrants each year over the coming decades.

Under that assumption, Americas population would be one billion by 2060. If that immigration continued, the population would be 1.6 billion by the close of the 21st century, making it the worlds largest population at that time. The second and third largest populations in 2100 would be India and China at 1.4 and 1.1 billion, respectively.

It is important to recognize that the continued growth of population, as some are recommending for America, is basically Ponzi demography. It is a demographic pyramid strategy for interminable population growth that benefits some people at the expense of human wellbeing and sustainability.

Many U.S. government officials, economists, business leaders and others are calling for increased population growth via greater immigration for the country. They contend that high rates of population growth are essential for Americas economic growth, the nations dynamism and continued prosperity, as well as for its geopolitical leadership and military power.

They also argue that many people around the world would like to migrate to the U.S. and should therefore have an opportunity to do so. However, the majority of Americans, approximately 62 percent, are not in favor of increased immigration. Most voters wish to maintain or decrease the current levels of U.S. immigration.

In addition, those calling for increased U.S. population growth typically ignore environmental concerns, including climate change, biodiversity loss, deforestation, congestion and pollution. Their analyses focus nearly exclusively on GDP growth, profits, taxes, labor force, politics, cultural leadership and power. In addition, they are either unable or unwilling to specify when Americas rapid population growth will stop.

Fifty years ago, the U.S. Commission on Population Growth and the American Future submitted a report to the U.S. president and Congress. That was the only time the president and Congress ever created a commission to study population growth and its impact on Americas future.

After several years of concentrated efforts, the commission concluded that, in the long run, no substantial benefits will result from further growth of the nations population, rather, the gradual stabilization of our population through voluntary means would contribute significantly to the nations ability to solve its problems.

The commission also said population growth was a major factor affecting domestic demand for resources and the deterioration of the environment. Slower population growth, including less legal immigration and stopping illegal immigration, would reduce pressures on the environment and the depletion of resources as well as gain time to find solutions to the nations problems. The conclusions of the commission continue to remain true.

In brief, slower rates of U.S. population growth, with the goal of gradually moving to population stabilization, will make it far easier and less costly for America to deal with climate change and environmental degradation, as well as other major challenges facing the nation.

Joseph Chamie is a consulting demographer, a former director of the United Nations Population Division and author of numerous publications on population issues, including his recent book, "Births, Deaths, Migrations and Other Important Population Matters."

Go here to read the rest:
For America's future population, how much is too much? | TheHill - The Hill

In a joint statement issued on Dec. 15, Amnesty International and seven other organizations called upon the Biden administration to end all expulsions and deportations of Haitians who enter the United States illegally or seek admission without proper documents. The groups want the United States to provide the Haitians with access to its asylum system.

They claim that the expelled Haitians are being returned to a humanitarian nightmare that includes widespread gang violence, an ongoing political crisis, devastation following a recent earthquake, and a COVID-19 risk in a country where vaccination rates reportedly are around 0.4 percent.

Asylum isnt the solution

The Haitians need help, but the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) does not provide asylum for aliens who are fleeing from the humanitarian nightmare the joint statement describes.

Section 1158(b)(1)(A) of the INA limits asylum eligibility to aliens who are refugees within the meaning ofsection 1101(a)(42)(A) of the INA, which provides that a refugee is a person who is outside of his own country and unwilling to return to it because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.

Temporary Protected Status isnt the solution either

Temporary Protected Status (TPS) is for aliens who are already in the United States, have lived here for a specified period of time, and cant return to their own countries because their countries are experiencing an ongoing armed conflict, an environmental disaster, or extraordinary and temporary conditions that prevent them from returning in safety.

The United States recently granted TPS for 18 months to Haitians who have continuously resided in the United States since July 29, 2021, and have been continuously physically present here since August 3, 2021. TPS is not available to Haitians who cannot meet these requirements.

Moreover, TPS is what it says it is: temporary protected status. It is not a path to citizenship or even to permanent resident status. Aliens with TPS are expected to leave the United States when their temporary status expires.

But the joint statement is right that life in Haiti is a humanitarian nightmare; in fact, Vice President Kamala HarrisKamala HarrisHas Biden kept his immigration promises? Harris acknowledges 'frustration' during Charlamagne tha God interview VP dilemma: The establishment or the base? MORE has acknowledged that Haiti has experienced so much tragedy that the United States should help it.

She is right.

Haitian President Jovenel Moises assassination in July resulted in political turmoil, and a 7.2 magnitude earthquake struck the countrys southern peninsula the following month.

Even earlier, on March 24, 2021, the United Nations Security Council reported violations and abuses of international human rights, including some involving the alleged use of deadly force against protesters and reported arbitrary arrests and detentions. It called upon the Inspector General of the Haitian National Police to investigate these incidents.

The following month, the State Department issued a Level 4 Travel Advisory for Haiti. Level 4 is the State Departments highest advisory level. Travelers are advised not to visit Haiti because of kidnapping, crime, and civil unrest. Robberies and kidnappings have become a daily reality, and buses are intercepted by armed gangs controlling access to large swaths of the country.

An April report from Harvard Law School's International Human Rights Clinic and a consortium of Haitian civil society organizations describes complicity of state officials and police in gang attacks that have left hundreds of people dead.

Violent criminal gangs pose a growing challenge to state authority. More than a third of Haiti's voters now live in areas controlled by criminal gangs.

What can the United States do?

Assist Haitian police. Several days ago, Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Brian A. Nichols had a meeting with Haitian officials about a request the Haitian government had made for the training of police officers, armaments necessary to face the firepower of the gangs and an intelligence service to accompany the dismantling of the gangs.

The United States will send trainers to Haiti to support the national police, and it will provide the police with armored vehicles, troop carriers, and lethal weapons to fight the gangs.

Military option. Charles T. Call, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute, recommends an expanded U.N. operation with a small military component.

After a coup ousted elected President Jean-Bertrand Aristide in 2004, gangs exercised considerable territorial control in Port-au-Prince. A U.N. mission launched well-planned operations which captured or killed several gang leaders and enabled weak government forces to reestablish control. The same thing can be done again in Haiti.

The U.N. also can draw on recent hybrid models of national/international missions, such as the U.N.-backedInternational Commission against Impunity in Guatemala, to work side-by-side with vetted Haitian prosecutors. A specialized, vetted prosecutorial unit could try cases in anti-corruption Haitian courts presided over by vetted judges, asoccurred in Guatemala and Honduras.

I just hope that efforts to help Haiti do not turn into a long-term project to address the root causes of illegal immigration from that country. That approach didnt work in Central America when it was tried by the Obama-Biden administration, and it isnt likely to work there now either, much less in Haiti.

The record-setting number of illegal crossings of the border with Mexico is a crisis that needs immediate attention, not long-term solutions that have little, if any chance, of working. And the same is true of the situation in Haiti.

Nolan Rappaportwas detailed to the House Judiciary Committee as an executive branch immigration law expert for three years. He subsequently served as an immigration counsel for the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims for four years. Prior to working on the Judiciary Committee, he wrote decisions for the Board of Immigration Appeals for 20 years. Followhis blogathttps://nolanrappaport.blogspot.com.

Excerpt from:
Asylum isn't the solution for Haitians' plight | TheHill - The Hill

The central and Assam governments agreed to update the NRC during the hearings in the Supreme Court in 2013, following the urging of the bench. On 17 December 2014, in a judgment authored by Justice Rohinton Nariman, the court ordered that the NRC exercise had to be completed within a time-bound manner and issued several directions for this.

On paper, this may not seem like an untoward thing to do. However, it was strange that the court would push so hard for this when it had also decided that the constitutionality of Section 6A was not clear, and it needed to be referred to a larger bench.

Even more controversially, the apex court, like it had in its Sarbananda Sonowal judgment from 2005, failed to identify any actual statistics or data on illegal immigration in Assam, which should have been the starting point for any discussion on a need to identify and deport illegal immigrants.

These discrepancies in the 2014 judgment have inevitably been part of the conversation about Justice Gogoi's involvement in the case, as those in favour of his recusal have argued that the court's approach (in the hearings as well) demonstrated a bias in favour of the narrative about illegal immigration in Assam.

See the rest here:
Ranjan Gogoi's Book Reveals Why He Should Have Recused Himself From NRC Case - The Quint

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

President Biden was billed as Americas savior from four years of political strife under former President Trump and the turmoil from the coronavirus pandemic, but the honeymoon period has quickly soured following his disastrous military withdrawal from Afghanistan, record inflation and gas prices and a COVID-19 death count that has surpassed his predecessors.

During his 2020 presidential campaign, Biden promised to "shut down" the pandemic, fight for the working class and regain the worlds respect following four years of the Trump administration. While the media fawned over Biden during his campaign and the early stages of his presidency, that all began to change following a series of blunders in August during his hasty military withdrawal from Afghanistan.

2021: THE YEAR BIDEN'S APPROVAL RATINGS SANK SLOWLY UNDERWATER

Americans left behind in Afghanistan

Biden faced widespread global backlash after Taliban insurgents retook Afghanistan in a matter of 11 days, winning the war 20 years after their ouster by U.S.-led forces on Aug. 15. On Aug. 26, during the U.S. military's mass evacuation at Hamid Karzai International Airport, suicide bombers killed at least 183 people, including 13 U.S. service members. The U.S. retaliated by launching two drone strikes against suspected ISIS-K terrorists, one of which ended up killing 10 Afghan civilians, including seven children.

The U.S. military evacuation, which required significant cooperation from the Taliban to complete, ended a day ahead of deadline on Aug. 30, leaving behind hundreds of U.S. citizens and tens of thousands of Afghan allies, despite Bidens promise days earlier to "get them all out." The State Department said nearly 500 U.S. citizens have been evacuated in the months following the withdrawal and that a handful still remain today.

President Biden delivers remarks about COVID at the White House.

Failure to shut down COVID-19

Bidens handling of Afghanistan was devastating to his approval ratings, which hovered in the low to mid 50s during his first six months in the White House and started a slow bleed thereafter. The drop was also fueled by a surge in COVID-19 cases and the unfortunate headlines that the number of deaths under his watch had surpassed those under Trump, despite the new prevalence of vaccinations.

Biden, who promised to "shut down" the virus on the campaign trail, took a dramatically different tone on Monday when he informed Americans that "there is no federal solution" to the pandemic and that it was up to governors a sentiment that was much maligned by Democrats under the Trump administration.

Until recently, the White House had no plans to provide free tests for individuals and only revealed that a plan was in the works this month after White House press secretary Jen Psaki previously dismissed the idea when it was suggested by NPR reporter Mara Liasson.

The White House has since agreed to deliver free tests to Americans but has yet to publicly disclose when and how the tests will be delivered. Biden conceded Monday that the steps he took earlier this year to ramp up testing capacity were "clearly not enough."

The New York Times recently wrotethat the new omicron variant sweeping the country "caught the White House off guard" and that "cases have far outstripped the governments ability to make tests available."

Meanwhile, Biden is facing mounting backlash over his vaccine mandates for the military, federal contractors and large private employers. The president admitted in a speech last week that his vaccine mandates are "unpopular" but that theyre for everyones own good.

RON KLAIN, BIDEN'S CHIEF OF STAFF, RETWEETS COLUMN CALLING 2021 NOT 'ALL BAD'

Border crisis

During the 2020 presidential election, Biden described "horrifying scenes" at the U.S.-Mexico border of "kids being kept in cages" and federal agents "ripping children from their mothers' arms" under the Trump administration.

But the "cages," or chain-link indoor enclosures to hold migrants at the border facilities, were built by the Obama administration, under which Biden served as vice president and they are still being used today by the current president. In fact, the Biden administration reopened several facilities that were closed under Trump to deal with the surge of illegal immigration since he took office.

And yet Democrats have remained noticeably silent. Vice President Kamala Harris, who was appointed border czar in March, was criticized for not taking a trip to the border fornearly 100 daysafter her appointment after she repeatedly laughed off questions about traveling there.

Meanwhile, U.S. authorities arrested 1.7 million migrants at the southern border this fiscal year, the most ever recorded, and only a small fraction have been vaccinated, while Biden imposes vaccine mandates for U.S. citizens who work in the federal government, including Border Patrol agents.

President Biden points to the Oval Office of the White House as he arrives on Marine One on the South Lawn in Washington, Sunday, Nov. 21, 2021, as he returns from Wilmington, Delaware. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

Record inflation

Two-thirds of Americans disapprove of Bidens handling of skyrocketing inflation, according to an ABC/Ipsos poll released this month.

The White House has started recognizing inflation as a problem after downplaying it as "transitory" for months. The consumer price index rose6.8% in November from a year ago, according to a new Labor Department report released Friday, marking the highest increase since June 1982, when inflation hit 7.1%.

Also, the highest average price of all grades of gasoline combined was $3.49 per gallon for the month of November, the highest average for the entire year, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). That number has since dropped only slightly to $3.35 a gallon.

Supply chain issues have also hit the U.S. economy, with massive port backlogs leading to empty store shelves during the crucial holiday shopping season.

Nearly three-quarters of those questioned in a Fox News national poll conducted last month said higher prices at the grocery store and the gas pumps are causing financial hardship.

The economy ranked as the top issue in the survey, and less than a quarter rated the economy positively, down 10 points from the beginning of Biden's presidency. The poll also indicated that inflation was the most pressing economic issue among Americans.

Crime wave

New data released last week by the Census Bureau revealed that residents of blue states have been fleeing to red states in droves in the past year. Some commentators have pointed to a nationwide crime surge in Democrat-led major cities, as well as strict COVID-19 restrictions in those same areas, as the reasoning behind the exodus.

Rep. Kat Cammack, R-Fla., told Fox News last week that she believes the crime surge is a result of Biden and the Democratic Party trying to "vilify the very heroes that are putting their lives on the line" and a "lack of resources" and support for law enforcement from the federal government.

Only recently did the White House attempt to separate itself from progressives like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, who have downplayed the crime wave. White House press secretary Jen Psaki this month said the increase in smash-and-grab robberies in retailers in major cities was a "serious concern" and that federal law enforcement was being provided to assist.

About 36% of Americans support Bidens handling of crimes, according the ABC/Ipsos poll released Dec. 12. The percentage is down from an October ABC/Ipsos poll, which found 43% of people approved of Bidens handling of crime.

President Joe Biden, with Vice President Kamala Harris, arrives to speak before signing the $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill into law during a ceremony on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, Monday, Nov. 15, 2021. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

BIDEN'S MOST MEMORABLE CLASHES WITH REPORTERS IN 2021

BBB failure

Biden has also faced trouble in his own party after his landmark multitrillion-dollar Build Back Better Act failed to gather enough votes after months of party infighting. After Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., announced that he could not reach an agreement with Biden on the package, the White House launched an attack essentially characterizing him as a traitor to the party. The response irked fellow moderates and sowed further discord in the party as it tries to advance the presidents agenda with only razor-thin majorities in the House and Senate and the looming 2022 midterm elections.

Progressives have since called on Biden to bypass Congress and impose components of the BBB Act.

The failure to pass the bill came on the heels of the Democratic Partys devastating loss in Virginia, where Republican Gov.-elect Glenn Youngkin eked out a win against former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe after trailing behind him in the polls for months.

All this while Biden faces mounting criticism in the mainstream media over his lack of press accessibility and unhappy staff who are reportedly eyeing the exits.

According to UC Santa Barbara's The American Presidency Project, Biden has done fewer than half of the 21 press conferences Trump did in his first year in office. Biden also set a presidential record by not holding a single news conference until 64 days into his term.

"Meet the Press" host Chuck Todd recently criticized Bidens White House as looking "like a White House from the '80s or '90s" that doesnt understand "how to work the 21st Century media environment."

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki and President Biden sit in Marine One prior to lifting off on the South Lawn of the White House Dec. 17, 2021, in Washington, D.C. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Staffers at the White House are also reportedly so unhappy that they anonymously leaked to Politico in the hopes that senior staffers would be alerted to the lack of comradery in the workplace.

"A lot of the natural coordination that happens in a typically functioning White House has been lost, and there has been no proactive effort to make up for it through intentional team building," one White House official said.

This comes as Harris faces her own staff departures amid allegations shes a "bully" and fostering a toxic work environment. Her approval ratings are even worse than Bidens at 28%, according to polling last month.

Despite the troubles facing Biden heading into the new year, White House chief of staff Ron Klain drew mockery on social media late Sunday night after he retweeted a post calling 2021 not "all bad."

"A look back at 2021!" Klain wrote enthusiastically.

While Bidens approval rating dipped below 40% in mid-November, he has seen a slight increase since, with a national poll from Monmouth University saying earlier this month that he stands at 40% approval and a 50% disapproval.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Biden quipped to "Tonight Show" host Jimmy Fallon earlier this month that he kept an eye on his approval ratings earlier in his presidency, "but now that theyre in the 40s, I don't pay attention."

The 79-year-old president has said he plans to run for reelection if his health allows it.

Fox News Brandon Gillespie, Paul Steinhauser, Emma Colton and Andrew Mark Miller contributed to this report.

More:
Joe Biden was the most powerful man in the world as it fell apart around him in 2021 - Fox News

Gov. Tom Wolf on Tuesday criticized a map for new congressional districts proposed by Pennsylvania House Republicans, accusing them of partisan gerrymandering to skew the map to favor the GOP.

The [Pennsylvania] Constitution invites us to do what we can to make sure the election process is a fair one, Wolf wrote to the top two House Republican leaders, Speaker Bryan Cutler (R., Lancaster) and Majority Leader Kerry Benninghoff (R., Centre). It is not an invitation to make cynical deals aimed at diminishing the importance of the vote. It is a recurring test of our commitment to the core principles of a healthy democracy. It is a test that [the GOP proposal] fails.

Wolfs comments set up a high-stakes showdown over the maps, which are based on population data from the 2020 federal census and will be used for the next decade. A spokesperson said Wolf opposes the bill in its current form and encouraged Republicans to work with Democrats to revise the map.

Wolf has refused to directly negotiate with lawmakers, saying its not his job to do so. He instead created a Redistricting Advisory Council, which laid out principles he says he will use in approving or vetoing any map he is sent.

In a letter, Wolf said the proposed congressional map violates several of those principles, including that the district populations vary too significantly without clear reason; that districts split communities, seemingly only to give Republicans an unfair edge; that the mapmaking process has been opaque with the public left in the dark about its choices; and that the map gives a structural advantage to Republican candidates that far exceeds the partys voter support.

An analysis of the map, he says, found it would consistently deliver a disproportionate number of seats to Republican candidates when compared with Pennsylvania voters preferences. This appears to be the result of intentional line-drawing choices that favor Republican candidates.

His veto would mean Pennsylvanias map for next years midterm elections, in which Republicans are hoping to win back control of Congress, could be decided by state courts. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which drew the current map in 2018, has a Democratic majority.

Wolf also took issue with the House committees process for negotiating and advancing the maps, saying he has been asked to negotiate a map with Republicans behind the scenes and would prefer that the issue be hashed out in public.

Grove on Tuesday issued a short and pointed response to Wolfs letter, saying he has taken the liberty of reserving a room in the Capitol for he and Wolf to hold a public meeting on Jan. 6.

If it is your intent to not negotiate congressional maps behind closed doors, let us meet in public, Grove wrote in a letter of his own.

Wolf swiftly declined.

The governor has already publicly provided his comments so he has no plans to accept this invitation, Wolf spokesperson Elizabeth Rementer said.

States must redraw their congressional maps every 10 years to reflect population changes. Those maps help determine the balance of power in the U.S. House of Representatives and the influence of local communities at the federal level. And because Pennsylvania is losing one of its 18 seats, one party will always have an edge going forward.

The committees map favors Republicans, with more districts likely to produce GOP representatives than Democratic ones. Republicans could gain one, if not more, congressional seats if the map becomes law.

The map is enacted as legislation, meaning it must be passed by both chambers of the Republican-controlled legislature before being approved by Wolf.

In the Senate, the Republican and Democratic chairs of the Senate State Government Committee have been negotiating for months on a separate map that they planned to introduce last week. Sen. David Argall (R., Schuylkill), the chair of the committee, said Tuesday that map was still pending with no specific timeline. The governors latest partisan rhetoric doesnt help move the process, he said.

Pennsylvania has a history of partisan gerrymandering, or drawing district boundaries for partisan advantage. In 2011, a Republican-drawn congressional map consistently elected 13 Republicans and five Democrats from the same districts, even as the state voted for Barack Obama and then Donald Trump for president and Democrat Bob Casey and Republican Pat Toomey for U.S. Senate.

In 2018, the state Supreme Court threw out the map, declaring it an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander and imposing its own map, under which Democrats and Republicans have won nine seats each.

Time is running out to have a map finalized for the May 17 primary elections, and a breakdown of the proper legislative process for enacting a congressional map would again send the issue to court.

The Pennsylvania Department of State has said maps must be in place by Jan. 24 for the state and counties to meet their election deadlines, including the Feb. 15 start of the nomination petition period for Democratic and Republican candidates to gather signatures to get on the primary ballot.

Wolf said he has significant concern about the timeline, noting that the legislature currently has only four voting days scheduled in January, including one on Jan. 24.

This is an extraordinarily compressed schedule for passage of a congressional map, presentment for my review, and resolution of any legal challenges which may be brought, and further increases my concerns about the transparency with which this process is being conducted, he wrote in the letter. It is not clear why the General Assembly did not move the process along more quickly despite an abundance of time to do so.

The legislature can reschedule the primary or change election deadlines it worked with Wolf to do so last year at the start of the pandemic, rescheduling the April 28, 2020, election for June 2 instead and some lawmakers, including Sen. Jake Corman (R., Centre), the top Republican in the chamber, have previously expressed willingness to do so.

But Senate Majority Leader Kim Ward (R., Westmoreland) told the Associated Press that she would consider moving the primary only as a last resort.

In a tweet last week, Grove said: We arent moving the primary.

A group of plaintiffs, represented by national Democratic election lawyer Marc Elias, sued the state earlier this month, saying it was clear the legislative process would fail and asking the Commonwealth Court to step in and draw a congressional map instead. (The court had dismissed an earlier lawsuit from the same plaintiffs, saying it was too early for such a challenge, but deadlines are much closer now.)

In an order last week, the court gave the legislature and Wolf until Jan. 30 to enact a congressional map. If the legislature doesnt pass one, or Wolf doesnt approve it, the court said it would instead select a plan from those submitted by the parties in the lawsuit.

The court order also said it would consider changing the 2022 election schedule if a map is not enacted by Jan. 30.

In the meantime, the plaintiffs have also asked the state Supreme Court to take up the issue itself and draw a map again, skipping the Commonwealth Court process altogether.

Originally posted here:
Pennsylvania congressional redistricting fight heats up as Gov. Wolf pushes back on House GOP proposal - The Philadelphia Inquirer