The minority argument in the redistricting case fails

From Urban Milwaukee:

The trouble with this argument is that if one starts with a highly gerrymandered map, a least change policy results in another highly gerrymandered map. Far from being neutral, the result is highly partisan, serving to lock one party in power indefinitely. It is hard to believe that the three dissenting justices did not see this. Certainly, a least change rule could be neutral–but only if the starting maps were also neutral.