U.S. top court takes up politically charged electoral map disputes




  • In US
  • 2019-01-04 21:56:48Z
  • By By Lawrence Hurley

By Lawrence Hurley

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court is giving itself another chance to make a definitive ruling on the legality of the long-established but often-criticized political practice called partisan gerrymandering in which state legislators draw electoral districts with the intent of entrenching their party in power.

The high court, which failed to resolve the issue last year, on Friday agreed to hear constitutional challenges to electoral maps drawn by Republicans in North Carolina and by Democrats in Maryland. The court will hear arguments in both cases in March, with rulings due by the end of June that could have enduring political consequences nationwide.

Critics have said partisan gerrymandering is becoming more extreme with the use of precision computer modeling to the point that it has begun to warp democracy in certain states by subverting the will of voters.

The high court has struggled over what to do about this practice in which boundaries of legislative districts are reconfigured by state lawmakers with the aim of making them friendly territory on Election Day for candidates in the party in power at the expense of opposing candidates.

The justices in June 2018 failed to issue definitive rulings in cases from Wisconsin and Maryland that election reformers had hoped would prompt the high court to crack down on partisan gerrymandering.

In the North Carolina case, Democratic voters accused the state's Republican-led legislature of drawing U.S. House of Representatives districts in 2016 in a way that disadvantaged Democratic candidates in violation of the constitutional guarantee of equal protection under the law. A lower court sided with the Democratic voters.

"Partisan gerrymandering in North Carolina has become so pervasive that the outcome of many elections is decided before a single vote is cast," said Janet Hoy, co-president of the League of Women Voters of North Carolina, which challenged the state's map.

In the Maryland case, Republican voters accused Democratic legislators of violating their free speech rights under the Constitution's First Amendment by redrawing boundaries of one particular U.S. House district to hinder Republican chances of winning. Democratic legislators in 2011 removed Republican-leaning areas and added Democratic-leaning areas to the district, which had been held by a Republican congressman but has been won by Democrats in every election since.

Democrat David Trone won the seat in November's election.

After the Supreme Court in June sidestepped a ruling on the merits of the case, a three-judge panel threw out the district in November as violating the constitutional rights of voters.

"It is our view that Supreme Court review is needed to provide guidance to the legislature in future redistricting," said Raquel Coombs, a spokeswoman for Democratic Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh.

TWO CENTURIES OF GERRYMANDERING

Gerrymandering is a practice dating back two centuries in the United States. While the Supreme Court has ruled against gerrymandering intended to harm the electoral clout of racial minorities, it has never curbed gerrymandering done purely for partisan advantage. A definitive ruling could reverberate through American elections for decades by either endorsing the practice or curbing it.

The court has repeatedly failed to devise a practical standard for judges to use to resolve claims of partisan gerrymandering and, in resolving the new cases, it could decide that one does not exist.

The Supreme Court in November agreed to hear in the coming months another gerrymandering case, one based on allegations that Virginia Republicans unlawfully diluted the clout of black voters when drawing state House of Delegates districts.

The composition of the high court, which has a 5- conservative majority, has changed since its last gerrymandering decisions. Conservative Justice Anthony Kennedy, who sometimes sided with the liberal justices in major cases, retired and was replaced by President Donald Trump's appointee Brett Kavanaugh in October.

In a 2004 gerrymandering case, Kennedy wrote a concurring opinion that left the door open for courts to intervene if a "workable" standard for identifying and measuring impermissible gerrymandering could be devised. It remains to be seen what Kavanaugh will do with the issue.

Legislative districts across the country are redrawn to reflect population changes contained in the nationwide census conducted by the federal government every decade.

This redistricting in most states is carried out by the party in power, though some states assign the task to independent commissions to ensure fairness. Gerrymandering typically involves packing voters who tend to favor a particular party into a small number of districts to diminish their statewide voting power while dispersing others in districts in numbers too small to be a majority.

Democrats have said partisan gerrymandering by Republicans in several states helped Trump's fellow Republicans maintain control of the House and various state legislatures for much of the decade, although Democrats seized a majority in the House in the November elections and made inroads in state legislatures.

(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung; Editing by Will Dunham)

COMMENTS

More Related News

Poll: What do Democrats want to hear about at the debates? (Hint: It's not Trump.)
Poll: What do Democrats want to hear about at the debates? (Hint: It's not Trump.)

Poll: Democratic voters are eager to hear from candidates on issues from health care to education. They don't want to spend debate time on Trump.

Trump to Florida Rally Crowd: Democrats
Trump to Florida Rally Crowd: Democrats 'Want to Destroy You'

President Trump officially "kicked off" his 2020 re-election campaign in Orlando, Florida on Tuesday night by telling a crowd of riled up supporters that Democrats are hell-bent on "destroying" them. "The Democrats don't care about Russia," the president growled. "They only care about their own political power. They went after my family, my business, my finances, my employees, almost everyone that I have ever known or worked with, but they are really going after you!"Asserting that the Russia investigation was really about erasing the votes of his supporters, Trump claimed it was all an attempt to erase the "legacy of the greatest campaign and the greatest election probably in the history...

What Is Gerrymandering? Supreme Court Decision Favors Democrats
What Is Gerrymandering? Supreme Court Decision Favors Democrats

What Is Gerrymandering? Supreme Court Decision Favors Democrats

Virginia Republicans lose in U.S. Supreme Court racial gerrymandering case
Virginia Republicans lose in U.S. Supreme Court racial gerrymandering case
  • US
  • 2019-06-17 14:34:13Z

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday handed Republican legislators in Virginia a defeat, leaving in place a ruling that invalidated state electoral districts they drew because they weakened the clout of black voters in violation of the U.S. Constitution. Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring, a Democrat

U.S. Supreme Court tosses ruling against wedding cake bakers who rebuffed lesbians
U.S. Supreme Court tosses ruling against wedding cake bakers who rebuffed lesbians

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday threw out a lower court ruling against the owners of an Oregon bakery who refused based on their Christian beliefs to make a wedding cake for a lesbian couple in another case pitting gay rights against religious rights. The justices in a brief order sent the case back to an Oregon court so it can reconsider its 2017 ruling upholding the state's $135,000 penalty against the bakery owners for violating an Oregon anti-discrimination law in light of the Supreme Court's 2018 decision in a strikingly similar case from Colorado.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

Cancel reply

Comments

Top News: US

facebook
Hit "Like"
Don't miss any important news
Thanks, you don't need to show me this anymore.