"Yes! State Legislative and Congressional Redistricting after the 2010 Census The short answer: independent panels everywhere. It next went to Gov. Mathis' removal was confirmed by a two-thirds vote in the Arizona State Senate. The plaintiffs argued that Bredar's decision violated the Three Judge Court Act (28 U.S.C. Gamesmanship in the creation of legislative districts is nearly as old as representative democracy itself. Some are made up of equal numbers of Republicans, Democrats and independents. The United States District Court for the District of South Carolina rejected the challenge on March 9, 2012. 34 state legislatures have primary control of their own district lines, and 39 legislatures have primary control over the congressional lines in their state (including the six states that And redistricting contributes to political polarization by making elections less competitive. Attorneys for Turzai and Scarnati wrote the following in their petition:[245], On March 19, 2018, the Supreme Court issued an order declining to intervene in the case. [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. The Blue party controls redistricting and does not want to worry about competitive elections. [332], In June 2012, Democrats assumed a one-vote majority in the Wisconsin State Senate as the result of a series of recall elections. On July 20, 2011, the legislature approved a congressional redistricting plan, which was signed into law by Governor Scott Walker on August 9, 2011. On June 29, 2011, the state legislature approved new congressional district boundaries, which were signed into law by the governor on August 9, 2011. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R) said, "There are only two things that are certain about this case: it's unprecedented and it isn't over. Changes to district maps can alter the balance of power in Congress and in the states. Associate Justice Elena Kagan penned a dissent, joined by Associate Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor. Republican political consultants or operatives did, in fact, conspire to manipulate and influence the redistricting processThey made a mockery of the Legislatures proclaimed transparency and open process of redistricting by doing all of this in the shadow of that process, utilizing the access it gave them to the decision makers, but going to great lengths to conceal from the public their plan and their participation in it. The District Court's decision to override the legislature's remedial map on that basis was clear error. Democrats are most concerned about potential Republican gerrymanders in Ohio, Texas, Florida, Georgia and North Carolina. Mark Harris, a Republican campaign consultant, said, "It's a straight Democratic gerrymander by a Democratic Supreme Court to help Democrats." The challengers submit that the District Court erred further when it considered the legislature's racial motive only to the extent that the challengers identified deviations from traditional redistricting criteria that were attributable to race and not to some other factor. Dermody said, "Its an attack on the independence of every judge in our state, one of the bedrock principles of our democracy. [297][298][299][300][301], On August 5, 2015, a panel of federal judges denied requests by state Republicans to extend the deadline. If that plan were not used this year, they contended, it could mean that the 2012 plan could not be replaced by a valid plan until the 2018 elections. The United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit affirmed Bredar's decision on November 12, 2014. This is how the U.S. House of Representatives, and most state legislatures, including Michigan, work. On January 21, 2018, state Republican lawmakers filed a motion requesting that the court stay its order pending an appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. On February 28, 2012, the district court issued a second set of interim district maps.[265][266][35]. 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. The plaintiffs further requested that a three-judge panel be convened to hear the case. According to All About Redistricting, Moreno and the other plaintiffs were "aligned with the interest of Colorado Democrats. Out-of-state residents and inmates with unknown previous residences were excluded from all district population counts under the three policies. See Rucho v. Common Cause for more information. The high court remanded the case to the lower court with instructions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. On February 27, 2012, the New Mexico First Judicial District Court issued its second state House redistricting plan, which stood. The court ordered state lawmakers to turn over digital files containing information on the state's current congressional district boundaries by January 31, 2018. The maps remained in effect during the 2014 election, but the court ordered the legislature to draw new districts for future elections. The court did not, however, order an immediate remedy. (Madison won anyway.). 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 court ruled that the existing map could be used for the 2016 general election. The plaintiffs petitioned the Supreme Court to expedite the case. The trial continued through July 15, 2017. The commission submitted its final recommendations to the state legislature on January 8, 2013. On February 16, 2012, the plan was signed into law. The state Senate approved the bill on November 15, 2019, by a vote of 24-17. [140], The court ordered state lawmakers to enact a new district map by September 1, 2017, for use in the 2018 general election. The court stopped short of deeming the district lines unconstitutional, however. E) has little appreciable effect on who wins or loses congressional races. Michiganders can also help by encouraging the few partisan politicians and lobbyists who are still fighting against the Independent Citizen Commission, to drop their attempt to subvert its work, and to instead embrace the new, fairer, and more transparent system of redistricting that a large majority of Michigan voters made possible by reforming the state constitution in 2018.". State Legislative and Congressional Redistricting after the 2010 Census, Population deviations for state legislative districts, How incarcerated persons are counted for redistricting, Lawsuits backed by National Redistricting Commission, State legislative district map challenges, State redistricting timelines following the 2010 census, California Proposition 40, State Senate Redistricting Plan Referendum (2012), Maryland Redistricting Referendum, Question 5 (2012), approved four redistricting ballot measures, California Citizens Redistricting Commission, Arguments for and against restoring Section 5 preclearance under the Voting Rights Act, Redistricting in Alabama after the 2010 census, United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, Alabama House of Representatives District 32, Alabama House of Representatives District 53, Alabama House of Representatives District 54, Alabama House of Representatives District 70, Alabama House of Representatives District 71, Alabama House of Representatives District 77, Alabama House of Representatives District 82, Alabama House of Representatives District 85, Alabama House of Representatives District 99, National Democratic Redistricting Committee, United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Redistricting in Alaska after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Arizona after the 2010 census, Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, Redistricting in Arkansas after the 2010 census, Redistricting in California after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Colorado after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Connecticut after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Delaware after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Florida after the 2010 census, Florida Congressional District Boundaries, Amendment 6 (2010), Redistricting in Georgia after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Hawaii after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Idaho after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Illinois after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Indiana after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Iowa after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Kansas after the 2010 census, United States District Court for the District of Kansas, Redistricting in Kentucky after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Louisiana after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Maine after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Maryland after the 2010 census, United States District Court for the District of Maryland, United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, Redistricting in Massachusetts after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Michigan after the 2010 census, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Redistricting in Minnesota after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Missouri after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Montana after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Nebraska after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Nevada after the 2010 census, Redistricting in New Hampshire after the 2010 census, Redistricting in New Jersey after the 2010 census, Redistricting in New Mexico after the 2010 census, Redistricting in New York after the 2010 census, Redistricting in North Carolina after the 2010 census, United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, Redistricting in North Dakota after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Ohio after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Oklahoma after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Oregon after the 2010 census, Redistricting in Pennsylvania after the 2010 census, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania v. the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Lieutenant Governor Mike Stack's proposal, Petitioners' proposal (i.e., League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, et al. Here in Michigan, for instance, we just amended our own state constitution to explicitly require partisan fairness, that is, that the maps be fair to all parties. "Redistricting keeps the assignation of seats to districts fixed at one seat per district and deals with changes in population by changing the district boundaries. The court ruled unanimously against the challengers, finding that they lacked standing to appeal. On June 26, 2013, Gov. New maps are drawn to keep the population in each congressional district roughly even. Once these districts are drawn, in each election, voters in each district elect one representative from the district to take a seat in a legislative chamber, such as the U.S. House of Representatives, or, closer to home, the Michigan House or Senate. The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on April 15, 2015. Pending appeals, the remedial map was slated to apply to the 2019 election cycle. The plan was signed into law by the governor the following day. For the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiffs verified complaint will be dismissed, and Plaintiffs motion for preliminary injunction will be denied. Lets look at a simple illustration. According to The New York Times, the high court's order made it more likely that the 2018 election would be held using the existing district plans. Associate Justice Clarence Thomas filed an opinion that concurred in part with the majority opinion and dissented in part. That opportunity might allow incumbents to createdistricts that are particularly favorable to them on personal grounds. The federal government stipulates that districts must have nearly equal populations and must not discriminate on the basis of race or ethnicity.[1]. "Redistricting is the process of drawing electoral district maps. The commission approved the proposal by a 4-1 vote on December 12, 2011. At the time of redistricting, Republicans held majorities in both chambers of the Missouri General Assembly. The lawmakers argued that implementation of this map would result in "electoral chaos" and "mass voter confusion." On May 23, 2016, the court announced its decision in the case, Wittman v. Personhuballah. They argued that the primary election should now be allowed to go forward on June 14 under the newly drawn plan of the lower court. Although the court did not directly address the constitutionality of preclearance itself, "it effectively halted" the use of the preclearance mechanism, according to The Leadership Conference. The result? The plaintiffs asked that the court bar the state from using the maps in the 2020 election cycle. Well get to that later. However, the court ordered state lawmakers to draft a new map during their next legislative session. Reviewing the evidence outlined above, two themes emerge. Democratic opponents of the maps commenced a petition drive to put the issue before voters in the next statewide election. Beyond that, each state is free to set up its own rules and its own processes for redistricting. [265][266][35], Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott petitioned a three-judge panel at the United States Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., for preclearance of the redistricting plans. . At the time of redistricting, Republicans controlled both chambers of the Texas State Legislature and the governorship. Larry Sabato, head of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, said, "[The remedial map] would nearly guarantee a Democratic takeover of the House of Delegates. The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's ruling on February 24, 2012. Justice Max Baer filed an opinion that concurred in part and dissented in part with the court's majority opinion. Persily released his draft congressional district map on January 13, 2012. This proved unnecessary, however, as a revised congressional map passed the state legislature on December 14, 2011, and was signed into law the next day.[202][35]. The court's opinion, penned by Roberts, did not address the broader question of whether partisan gerrymandering claims are justiciable and remanded the case to the lower court for further proceedings. "[136], On November 20, 2019, the court issued an order delaying the congressional candidate filing period for the 2020 election cycle pending resolution of the case. Take North Carolina in 2012, after the state enacted an aggressively gerrymandered map. In the wake of the 2010 election, however, Republicans held three congressional seats. Sixty percent of them belong to the Blue party, and 40 percent to the Red party. In the subsequent redistricting cycle, Democrats controlled both chambers of the state legislature and the governorship. '". By the time the next redistricting cycle comes around, the die will be cast. PDF The Effects of Redistricting on Incumbents On January 10, 2017, the high court issued an order halting the special elections pending appeals. The plaintiffs requested that a three-judge panel of the court be convened to consider the case. [160][161][162], North Carolina State Senate President Pro tem Phil Berger (R) and North Carolina House Speaker Timothy K. Moore (R) said in a joint statement on the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily blocking the order that:[163], Senate Minority Leader Dan Blue (D) said in a town hall in March 2017 that he was confident the special elections would happen in 2017. The United States District Court for the District of South Carolina rejected the challenge on March 9, 2012. On February 12, 2018, a panel of state superior court judges declined this request. On December 23, 2011, the congressional redistricting commission approved its plan for new congressional district boundaries. For further details, please click here. 1) Redistricting A) happens every 4 years. If we draw the districts like this, Blue holds a majority in all five districts. Another process directly linked to the census is reapportionment, which occurs primarily at the federal level. Click here to contact our editorial staff, and click here to report an error. Moreover, the deficiencies identified herein are legal rather than factual in nature. The maps' opponents alleged that the 2013 maps, like the original maps adopted in the wake of the 2010 United States Census, unconstitutionally diluted the voting rights of racial minority groups. The district court panel overseeing the case adopted Persily's recommendations on January 19, 2018. Meanwhile, Democratic attorney Marc Elias, who initiated the suit, praised the order: "In Virginia, the Federal Court in the long-running state house redistricting case has ordered the special master to adopt the alternative-map configuration we advocated. The plaintiffs requested that the court intervene to prevent the map's use in future elections. In a press release, Wolf said, "The analysis by my team shows that, like the 2011 map, the map submitted to my office by Republican leaders is still a gerrymander. 5) What is the Independent Citizen Commission, what is it doing andhow is your researchinforming it? [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. In its order, the court wrote, "The loss to Plaintiffs' fundamental rights guaranteed by the North Carolina Constitution will undoubtedly be irreparable if congressional elections are allowed to proceed under the 2016 congressional districts." "Redistricting is the process of drawing electoral district maps. [65], The revised Senate maps did not take effect until 2014. The Blue party can carve out four very safe seats, leaving the Red party with one. Thomas authored an opinion that concurred in part with the majority opinion and in the judgment, joined by Gorsuch. 2011 was the first year in which a GIS online platform was used during the redistricting process. In most states, the state legislature has primary control of the redistricting process, both for state legislative districts and for congressional districts. Jon Eguia, a professor in Michigan State Universitys department of economics, researches partisan advantages in redistricting maps. When politicians use redistricting to manipulate . They lost. What is the Independent Citizen Commission, what is it doing andhow is your research, University Policy on Relationship Violence and Sexual Misconduct, Notice of Nondiscrimination, Anti-Harassment and Non-Retaliation. The state's independent redistricting commission drew a legislative map (the Arizona Senate and House use the same map, with each district electing one senator and two representatives) with a . According to the lawsuit, the plans diluted minority voting strength, violated the "one person, one vote" principle, and illegally split counties in order to consolidate Republican dominance in other districts. Many states have other criteria: keeping districts geographically contiguous and compact, ensuring that elections will be competitive, or safeguarding partisan fairness so districts reflect statewide voting trends rather than giving one political party an unearned advantage. (Six states will have only one House seat, so they have no congressional districts to draw.). 12. On April 11, 2012, the state legislature approved a congressional redistricting plan, which was signed into law by the governor on April 23, 2012. Lets consider a slightly bigger state, with 50 people, but still just five districts. Wynn wrote the majority opinion. However, the district court was directed to reconsider its order for special elections in 2017, with the high court finding that the district court had not conducted the proper analysis in determining its remedy. The court found that the General Assembly of North Carolina had placed too many minority voters into a small number of districts, thereby diluting the impact of their votes. Understanding redistricting is essential to understanding just how much a vote actually counts. The court ruled 2-1 on the matter. Associate Justice Stephen Breyer penned the opinion. The remedial Senate plan can be accessed here. Associate Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Stephen Breyer dissented. [134][135], Democrats opposed the remedial plan and announced their intention to challenge it in court. Those Republican seats threatened to tip Democratic. The justices will consider whether state courts, when finding . This opinion was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy. On November 11, 2011, a group of Democratic voters challenged the new congressional and state legislative district maps in federal court, alleging that the new maps constituted "unlawful racial gerrymandering and a violation the Voting Rights Act." [209][47], Following the 2010 United States Census, South Carolina gained a congressional seat. Redistricting became much fairer once a pair of Supreme Court rulings in the 1960s required districts to have equal population. [331][35], In November 2011, commissioners in Jefferson County challenged the newly enacted congressional district map in federal court. We need districts roughly the same size. On June 27, 2019, the high court issued a joint ruling in this case and Lamone v. Benisek, finding that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions that fall beyond the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary. The state legislature argued that the use of the word "legislature" in this context is literal; therefore, only a state legislature may draw congressional district lines. 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." [119][120], Following the 2010 United States Census, New Jersey lost one congressional seat. This map displays what type of redistricting each state uses. On September 12, 2017, the high court voted 5-4 to implement a full stay against both rulings pending progression of the state's appeal. [29][30], Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 2015. Following the 2010 United States Census, Alabama neither gained nor lost congressional seats. Persily's proposed maps can be accessed here. Brobson wrote the following:[214][215], Suzanne Almeida, the executive director of the League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, said, "While we are disappointed that Judge Brobson did not find that the existing state of Pennsylvania law was violated by the 2011 partisan gerrymander, we are encouraged by the strong findings of fact in our favor and look forward to the Pennsylvania Supreme Courts ultimate decision in the case." 13-1314, slip op. Check the topics you would like to read about. Perry signed the maps into law. Reset Selection Mark for Review What's This? On October 7, 2014, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia struck down the state's congressional map. Seats in Congress The plaintiffs alleged that the new district lines constituted a partisan gerrymander in favor of Democrats. So between years that end in zero and years that end in two, the . [252][253][254][255][256], On March 19, 2018, the three-judge panel ruled unanimously to dismiss the complaint. As of the 2010 census, there were 16 states whose redistricting plans were subject to preclearance requirements under the Voting Rights Act. We can draw them to fairly reflect the population: Blue gets three seats, Red gets two seats. "All the Commission meetings are open to the public, and you can follow them live on YouTube or Facebook. Legal suits were filed challenging the new congressional district map, but these were all ultimately dismissed. Judges Denise Hood and Gordon Quist, appointed to the bench by Presidents Clinton and George H. W. Bush (R), respectively, joined Clay's opinion. 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. District lines can be redrawn to favor one party or the other, to protect incumbent elected officials, or to help or harm a specific demographic group. [29], On November 1, 2011, the chair of the redistricting commission, Colleen Mathis, was impeached for alleged violations of the state's Open Meetings Law. On October 28, 2019, the court approved the remedial plans. At the time of redistricting, Republicans controlled both chambers of the state legislature and the governorship. We basically have a Wild West of redistricting. 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. He wrote the following in his dissent: "As I understand the record, the redistricting decision here was driven by a desire to protect incumbents and by the application of traditional redistricting precepts even though race was considered because the legislature had to be certain that the plan complied with federal law, including the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Maryland and New York implemented their policies during the 2010 redistricting cycle, while Delaware implemented its policy in the 2020 cycle. [203][204] The high court granted the stay on May 24, 2019. [240][241], In its order, the court set the primary election filing period for congressional candidates to begin on February 27, 2018, and to end on March 20, 2018. The full text of the court's ruling, including map images, can be accessed here. The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear a case that could dramatically change the way elections for Congress and the presidency are conducted by handing more power to state legislatures and blocking state courts from reviewing challenges to the procedures and results. On January 31, 2018, attorneys for Pennsylvania State Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati (R) submitted a letter to the court indicating that Scarnati would not furnish the court with the requested data: "In light of the unconstitutionality of the Court's Orders and the Court's plain intent to usurp the General Assembly's constitutionally delegated role of drafting Pennsylvania's congressional districting plan, Senator Scarnati will not be turning over any data identified in the Court's Orders." For District 12, that is all we must do, because North Carolina has made no attempt to justify race-based districting there. 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. And data from the 2020 census, delayed by the pandemic, was just released in August. 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. For more information, click "[Show more]" below. The Remedial Plan is superior or comparable to all plans submitted by the parties, the intervenors, and amici, by whichever Census-provided definition one employs. This Court recognized that the primary responsibility for drawing congressional districts rested squarely with the legislature, but we also acknowledged that, in the eventuality of the General Assembly not submitting a plan to the Governor, or the Governor not approving the General Assemblys plan within the time specified, it would fall to this Court expeditiously to adopt a plan based upon the evidentiary record developed in the Commonwealth Court. So what is redistricting? The only injuries [the maps' challengers'] established in this case were that they had been placed in their legislative districts on the basis of race. 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. 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.