The district court panel overseeing the case adopted Persily's recommendations on January 19, 2018. On August 3, 2011, the Nevada First Judicial District Court appointed a three-member panel to draft a new congressional district map. The suits were backed by the National Redistricting Commission, a nonprofit affiliate of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, chaired by Eric Holder, former U.S. Attorney General. The court gave the legislature until October 30, 2018, to draw new district lines. Drafts of the new district maps were slated to be released in advance of expected public hearings on August 22 or 23. On June 27, 2019, the high court issued a joint ruling in this case and Rucho v. Common Cause, finding that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions that fall beyond the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary. The new state House map reduced the number of majority-minority districts from 13 to 11. States have often been forced to redraw maps found to have violated the Voting Rights Act or the equal protection clause of the Constitution. Though nothing can stop you from going to a public hearing on your states new maps and giving the mapmakers a piece of your mind. Redistricting is the process by which new congressional and state legislative district boundaries are drawn. In those contests, the most devoted partisans are often the most important constituency. As a result, the earlier refusal to preclear Texas' maps was vacated. Each state has its own process. And appealing to them is pushing incumbents and primary challengers alike to the political fringes. Associate Justice Elena Kagan penned a dissent, joined by Associate Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor. October 21, 2021 In a memorandum accompanying the impeachment resolutions, Dush said, "[The court's action] overrides the express legislative and executive authority, found in Article IV, Section 15 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, concerning the Governors veto authority and the General Assemblys subsequent authority to override such veto. Congress may pass federal laws regulating congressional elections that automatically displace ("preempt") any contrary state statutes, or enact its own regulations concerning those aspects of elections that states may not have addressed. The commissioners argued that the "elongated 2nd District violated compactness standards, diluted the Panhandle's influence, and resulted in the largest population deviation between districts in the county4,871 people." According to The Washington Post, Drew Compton, an attorney for Senate Republicans, said that "a separation of powers case will form the essence of the GOP's argument. (2015). The Justice Department cleared the state legislative maps on October 5, 2012. Yes and no. [65], On June 13, 2018, attorneys for Democratic voters in three states (Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana) filed three separate lawsuits in federal court, alleging in each that existing congressional district maps prevented black voters from electing candidates of their choosing, in violation of the Voting Rights Act. Supreme Court to hear case on state authority over elections (Madison won anyway.). [46], On November 7, 2018, a three-judge panel of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland struck down the congressional after finding that it constituted an illegal partisan gerrymander against Republicans. On June 21, 2013, the state legislature approved permanent congressional and state legislative redistricting plans. [24][25], On June 13, 2018, attorneys for Democratic voters in three states (Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana) filed three separate lawsuits in federal court, alleging in each that existing congressional district maps prevented black voters from electing candidates of their choosing, in violation of the Voting Rights Act. The plaintiffs further requested that a three-judge panel be convened to hear the case. Kennedy wrote the following in the court's majority opinion:[315][316], Meanwhile, the Supreme Court affirmed the district court's ruling in the case of the remaining challenged district (District 75), arguing that the lower court's ruling was consistent with Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama, a case decided by the high court in 2015. PDF POWER - NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund On August 31, 2017, Alito issued a similar order on the district court's August 24 ruling on Texas' state House district plan. It's the redrawing of the boundaries of congressional and state legislative districts. Their map clearly seeks to benefit one political party, which is the essence of why the court found the current map to be unconstitutional. So what is redistricting? At the time of the 2010 census, Section 4 provided a formula for identifying which jurisdictions had engaged in racial discrimination and remedies to alleviate the discrimination. Alabama. The New Mexico Supreme Court assigned a retired judge, James Hall, to draw the final congressional map. As Republican David Lewis, the chairman of the state legislature's redistricting committee, put it, "I propose we draw the maps to give an advantage to 10 Republicans and 3 Democrats, because I do . The majority opinion read, in part, as follows:[238], Chief Justice Thomas Saylor filed a dissenting opinion, which read, in part, as follows:[239], Justices Sallie Mundy and Max Baer also penned individual dissents. ), Intervenors' proposal (i.e., a group of Republican candidates, party officials, and activists), United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Redistricting in Rhode Island after the 2010 census, Redistricting in South Carolina after the 2010 census, United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, Redistricting in South Dakota after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Tennessee after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Texas after the 2010 census, United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, unconstitutionally diluted the voting rights of racial minority groups, Redistricting in Utah after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Vermont after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Virginia after the 2010 census, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama, Bethune-Hill v. Virginia Board of Elections, Redistricting in Washington after the 2010 census, Redistricting in West Virginia after the 2010 census, United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, Redistricting in Wisconsin after the 2010 census, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, Redistricting in Wyoming after the 2010 census, Map of Redistricting websites for each State, Purdue University List of State Redistricting Web sites, State legislative and congressional redistricting, Partisan balance of redistricting committees, https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=State_Legislative_and_Congressional_Redistricting_after_the_2010_Census&oldid=8738962, District maps enacted after the 2010 Census, Conflicts in school board elections, 2021-2022, Special Congressional elections (2023-2024), 2022 Congressional Competitiveness Report, State Executive Competitiveness Report, 2022, State Legislative Competitiveness Report, 2022, Partisanship in 2022 United States local elections. Holding on to your job and political power is easier when you dont have to worry about a tough challenge from the other party. Take Oregons new congressional maps. This court of action cannot square with either the plain text of the U.S. Constitution's Elections Clause, which delegates redistricting authority to 'the Legislature' of each state, or with this Court's interpretive precedent, which holds that '[r]edistricting involves lawmaking in its essential features and most important aspect.'. The first element in the formula was whether, as of November 1, 1964, the jurisdiction maintained a "test or device," such as a literacy test restricting the opportunity to register and vote. The court ordered state lawmakers to redraw the lines for the following districts:[22][23], New state legislative district maps were adopted in May 2017. What is Redistricting? - Public Mapping Project The Minnesota Supreme Court appointed a judicial panel to draw the lines. accessibility issues, please let us know. [133], On November 14, 2019, the state House approved a remedial district plan (HB1029) by a vote of 55-46 .The vote split along party lines, with all Republicans voting in favor of the bill and all Democrats voting against it. On January 7, 2016, this panel unveiled Virginia's new congressional district map and ordered that it be used for the 2016 elections. This decision requires each state to draw its U.S. Congressional districts so that they are approximately equal in population. [148][149][150], On June 28, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a per curiam ruling in North Carolina v. Covington, affirming in part and remanding in part the district court decision (i.e., allowing the court's order to stand as it applied to districts in Hoke, Cumberland, Guilford, Sampson, and Wayne counties but overturning the district court's decision as it applied to districts in Wake and Mecklenburg counties).[151][152][153][154]. '"[315][317], On March 31, 2017, in a separate state-level case, Richmond Circuit Judge W. Reilly Marchant ruled that the contested districts did not violate state constitutional requirements for district compactness. NCSL staff are prepared to visit your state to work with legislators and staff on almost any public policy issue or issue related to the management of a legislature. Meanwhile, Republican Representative Patrick McHenry dismissed these criticisms: "Eric Holder and (former President) Barack Obama have raised a lot of money for this outcome, and theyve pursued a really aggressive legal strategy for their partisan outcomes, and right now theyre calling it partisan gerrymandering, but what theyre seeking is partisan gerrymandering for the left. Wisconsin Solicitor General Misha Tseytlin doubted the viability of a further challenge, saying, "I think it is quite notable that [the plaintiffs] put together a failry large, well-funded litigation team, had a four-day trial, and the Supreme Court unanimously held 9-0 they did not prove the basis of standing. On August 5, 2011, the legislature approved a congressional redistricting plan, which was signed into law by the governor on August 18, 2011. The unanimous opinion of the court was delivered by Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote the following:[91], In February 2017, a three-judge panel was named to hear the case. The court's full opinion can be accessed here. On June 25, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a 5-4 ruling reversing the decision of the district court with respect to all challenged districts except House District 90. [169][170][171][172], On August 28, 2017, the House passed HB 927, the House redistricting plan, and sent it to the Senate. On August 17, 2012, the independent redistricting commission released a tentative state legislative district proposal. On February 10, 2012, the state legislature approved new congressional district boundaries, which were signed into law on the same day. By Nick Corasaniti,Reid J. Epstein,Taylor Johnston,Rebecca Lieberman and Eden WeingartNov. In a statement, Holder said, "The creation of additional districts in which African Americans have the opportunity to elect their preferred candidates in each of these states will be an important step toward making the voting power of African Americans more equal and moving us closer to the ideals of representative democracy." [140], On August 30, 2017, the remedial House and Senate district plans (HB 927 and SB 691, respectively) became law. The court scheduled a hearing for December 2, 2019, to consider both the plaintiffs' and the defendants' motions for summary judgment. Mathis' removal was confirmed by a two-thirds vote in the Arizona State Senate. Whether a single-judge district court may determine that a complaint covered by 28 U.S.C. The state filed a series of motions to dismiss in 2012 and 2013, but these were ultimately denied. Rather, a court must also consider whether the movant has shown 'that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.'. Others feature a nonpartisan chair as a tiebreaker. MSU is an affirmative-action, equal-opportunity employer. Robert Bentley (R) for his signature, then to the U.S. Department of Justice for preclearance. In most states, the state legislature is responsible for drawing and approving electoral districts with a simple majority subject to a gubernatorial veto. But the Red party controls the redistricting process, and wants to gain an advantage. House Speaker Kirk Cox (R) criticized the plan: "The Eastern District Court selected a series of legally indefensible redistricting modules that attempts to give Democrats an advantage at every turn. On February 5, 2018, the Supreme Court denied Republicans' request for a stay. On October 30, 2017, Republican lawmakers filed a motion objecting to the appointment of Persily as special master; they argued that there was ample time for the state legislature to make any court-ordered amendments to the maps before the 2018 candidate filing period. The matter was brought before the New Mexico First Judicial District Court, which issued an opinion establishing new state House district lines on January 3, 2012. The following was the question before the court:[90], On December 8, 2015, the court issued its ruling in the case, reversing the decision of the Fourth Circuit and remanding the case for further proceedings. The remedial House plan can be accessed here. [197][199], Following the 2010 United States Census, Ohio lost two congressional seats. A number of lawsuits followed, including Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission. On March 24, 2017, state attorneys petitioned the Supreme Court of the United States to reverse the district court's ruling. This year, with an extremely slim Democratic margin in the House of Representatives, simply redrawing maps in a few key states could determine control of Congress in 2022. At the time of redistricting, Republicans controlled both chambers of the state legislature, but a Democrat held the governorship. Lawmakers can take into account political considerations and election data when drawing districts. Judge Kevin Brobson penned the document, which is not itself a binding legal decision. Dermody said, "Its an attack on the independence of every judge in our state, one of the bedrock principles of our democracy. Before Democrats assumed the majority, they had asked Michael Best and Friedrich to turn over the requested records, but the firm refused, saying that it answered to the majority leader. "Redistricting is the process of drawing electoral district maps. The court heard oral arguments about the map on March 21, 2016. Perhaps no city in America was more cracked than Austin, Tex., the only U.S. city of less than a million residents that was divided among six congressional districts. The court ordered that these two districts be redrawn. That summer, opponents of the new legislative and congressional maps filed suit in federal court through Baldus v. Brennan, alleging "partisan and racial gerrymandering and violation of the Voting Rights Act and various state constitutional criteria." Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Anthony Kennedy, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch formed the majority. On November 13, 2015, circuit court judge George Reynolds rejected this request, saying, "It appears to me that we just don't have enough time left to engage in any process, other than the one we are currently on. Lawmakers should minimize the splitting of precincts when drawing districts. [42][35], Following the 2010 United States Census, Florida gained two congressional seats. The House map enacted by the legislature on August 30, 2017, is displayed below. The commission approved the final maps on January 17, 2012. On August 13, 2011, the legislature approved a new congressional map. On September 17, 2019, the state legislature approved H1020 and SB 692, remedial district plans for the state House and Senate, respectively. Associate Justice Stephen Breyer penned the opinion. [178] North Carolina Democratic Party chairman Wayne Goodwin issued a statement via Twitter in support of the ruling: "This is a stunning rebuke of Republican legislators who refused to fix their racist maps and a collosal political failure from Speaker Moore and Senator Berger. But there is wide disagreement over how different factors should be weighted, like geographic continuity, competitiveness, minority representation and partisan fairness. The redistricting backup commission was convened to draw the map. Governor Ralph Northam (D) convened a special session of the legislature, beginning August 30, 2018, to redraw the maps. The court further ordered that the state legislative district map adopted during the 2000 redistricting cycle would apply to elections taking place in 2012. While special elections have costs, those costs pale in comparison to the injury caused by allowing citizens to continue to be represented by legislators elected pursuant to a racial gerrymander. Districts must adhere to county groupings. "[214][216][217], According to The Philadelphia Inquirer, "the state Supreme Court can take Brobson's conclusions into account but will ultimately make its own ruling." In the wake of the 2010 election, however, Republicans held three congressional seats. Democrats lost five. The pair issued a joint statement announcing the plan: "The Republican Legislative Leaders in the House and Senate have agreed to a Congressional District Map that complies fully with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's order and opinion." The trial court rejected the attempt on March 10, 2014, and the United States Supreme Court affirmed that decision on October 6, 2014. These new maps resembled the second interim maps issued by the district court. Are some more fair than others? These were ultimately consolidated into one suit: Moreno et al. The remaining maps were enacted in the first six months of 2013. The legislature passed another congressional district map on May 25, 2011, which was also vetoed by the governor. Understanding redistricting is essential to understanding just how much a vote actually counts. We find that the Enacted Plan violates Plaintiffs First and Fourteenth Amendment rights because it deliberately dilutes the power of their votes by placing them in districts that were intentionally drawn to ensure a particular partisan outcome in each district. Lawmakers can make efforts to avoid pairing incumbents within the same district. The new map adds Richmond and Petersburg to the 4th District, represented by Republican J. Randy Forbes, improving Democrats chances of winning the district in November. Even if we assumecontrary to the findings of the District Courtthat plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their claims, the balance of equities and the public interest tilted against their request for a preliminary injunction. Out-of-state residents and inmates with unknown previous residences were excluded from all district population counts under the three policies. If political motivation is improper, then the task of redistricting should be constitutionally assigned to some other body, a change in law we lack any authority to effect. The Illinois State Senate approved the plan on May 31, 2011, and Governor Pat Quinn (D) signed it into law on June 24, 2011. Because plaintiffs have shown that race predominated in Virginias 2012 plan and because defendants have failed to establish that this race-based redistricting satisfies strict scrutiny, we find that the 2012 plan is unconstitutional and will require the commonwealth to draw a new congressional district plan. On August 11, 2016, the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina ruled that North Carolina's state legislative district map constituted an illegal racial gerrymander. "Since the 1840s, Congress has mandated that states draw district maps and elect one representative per district for the U.S. House of Representatives. This article deals with the redistricting efforts undertaken by the states after the 2010 census. Sure. By the time the next redistricting cycle comes around, the die will be cast. In its ruling, the court wrote the following:[157][158], State Representative David Lewis (R) and State Senator Bob Rucho (R) issued a press release on November 29, 2016, criticizing the order:>, The North Carolina Democratic Party (NCDP) voiced its support of the special elections following the federal order:[159], On December 30, 2016, Republican legislators petitioned the United States Supreme Court to intervene and stay (i.e., suspend) the district court's decision. This is how many states, primarily in the South, sought to limit the influence of Black voters over the decades before the introduction of the Voting Rights Act. House Democratic Retirements Pile Up as Party Fears Losing Majority 2284), which requires a three-judge district court panel to be convened for cases challenging the constitutionality of congressional or state legislative redistricting plans. On June 8, 2011, Governor Robert Bentley (R) signed the map into law. "[131], On September 4, 2018, the district court announced it would not order changes to the map before Novembers election, finding that imposing a new schedule for North Carolina's congressional elections would, at this late juncture, unduly interfere with the State's electoral machinery and likely confuse voters and depress turnout. On October 1, 2018, the defendants appealed the district court's decision to the United States Supreme Court, which agreed to take up the case and scheduled oral argument for March 26, 2019. GOP lawmakers also argued that Persily might be biased because he "has a history of commenting negatively on North Carolina districting matters and working on districting matters with organizations who are allied with the plaintiffs in this case.