Leaving out the racial issue, on exactly what constitutional grounds do you reject one map vs another? Let’s suppose you insist on a rational rule for contiguous districts vs fragmented. I like that. But what exactly would make a disjoint district unconstitutional?

If the districts greatly vary in population, that can be legally challenged.

But if some super smart people have a wonderful neutral redistricting algorithm, that does not necessarily mean it can sustain a challenge or that is immune from one.

The SCOTUS has never really wanted to tackle partisan gerrymandering because it can define crisp rules that don’t look arbitrary.