What Is Gerrymandering? Supreme Court Decision Favors Democrats

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday has ruled against the Virginia House of Delegates in a racial gerrymandering case, tossing out a case that gives the state's Democrats a long-sought-after victory. Gerrymandering occurs when voting districts are redrawn to benefit one party over another in elections, forcing the other side to "waste" votes. For example, someone drawing district lines might bunch opposition party voters together in one district in order to concentrate their votes so that they influence only a few seats.

The high court said in a 22-page opinion the G.O.P.-controlled house didn't have a legal right to challenge a previous lower court opinion that struck down several district maps they had drawn as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. As a result of the ruling, court-ordered maps favoring Democrats will remain in use.

Or, it could mean grouping those opposition voters into districts where the other party gains a hold on power, making it very difficult for the opposing party to win elections.

The Supreme Court took the case after Virginia's House of Delegates filed an appeal after the state's attorney general, a Democrat, decided not to appeal the ruling striking down the voting maps.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the opinion for a 5-4 decision in the case, Virginia House of Delegates v. Bethune-Hill, getting both liberal and conservative backing from Justices Clarence Thomas, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Neil Gorsuch. With the court dismissing the challenge on standing grounds, the justices didn't rule if the maps constitute an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. "The House observes that Virginia gives redistricting authority to the 'General Assembly.' True enough," Ginsburg wrote. "(But) One House of its bicameral legislature cannot alone continue the litigation against the will of its partners in the legislative process. "If the State had designated the House to represent its interests, and if the House had in fact carried out that mission, we would agree that the House could stand in for the State. Neither precondition, however, is met here," Ginsburg continued. In opposition, Justice Samuel Alito Jr. wrote that the Virginia House of Delegates suffered an injury and had every right to pursue a lawsuit, even using a sports analogy in his defense. "It is precisely because of the connections between the way districts are drawn, the composition of a legislature and the things that a legislature does that so much effort is invested in drawing, contesting and defending districting plans," Alito Jr. wrote. "Does a string quartet have an interest in the identity of its cellist?" he asked. "Does a basketball team have an interest in the identity of its point guard?" Alito Jr. was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., and Justices Samuel Breyer and Brett Kavanaugh in dissent. Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring said in a statement that Monday's Supreme Court ruling is a win for democracy. "It's unfortunate that House Republicans wasted millions of taxpayer dollars and months of litigation in a futile effort to protect racially gerrymandered districts, but the good news is that this fall's elections will take place in constitutionally drawn districts," Herring said. Eric Holder, the former U.S. attorney general under former president Barack Obama, said in a tweet Monday that the ruling is significant for those Virginians forced since 2011 to vote in racially gerrymandered districts that unjustly undermined the privilege to vote. "Today's ruling from the Supreme Court is an important victory for African Americans in Virginia who have been forced to vote in racially gerrymandered districts that kept rightful power away from them. Shameful. Fair elections will finally happen this fall for ALL Virginians," Holder said.

More must-read stories from Fortune:

-2020 Democratic primary debates: Everything you need to know

-The campaign finance power behind Trump impeachment efforts

-Not every state is restricting abortion rights-some are expanding them

-Richard Nixon's "Western White House" is back on the market-at a discount

-Trump administration to use former Japanese internment camp to house migrant children

Get up to speed on your morning commute with Fortune's CEO Daily newsletter.


More Related News

Supreme Court grants Trump
Supreme Court grants Trump's request to temporarily block two banks from disclosing his financial records

In an emergency filing, President Trump had asked the Supreme Court to block two banks from releasing his financial records to two House committees.

Trump asks Supreme Court to stop banks from disclosing his financial data
Trump asks Supreme Court to stop banks from disclosing his financial data
  • US
  • 2019-12-06 19:42:59Z

President Donald Trump, fighting to keep details of his finances secret, asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday to prevent records held by Deutsche Bank AG and Capital One Financial Corp from being handed over to Democratic-led congressional panels. Trump's lawyers asked the high court to put a hold a Dec. 3 ruling by the Manhattan-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals directing the two banks to comply with April subpoenas by the House of Representatives Financial Services Committee and Intelligence Committee for the financial records. If the justices grant that request, it would give Trump's lawyers time to file a formal appeal of the lower court ruling.

Trump Appeals to Supreme Court on Financial-Records Subpoena
Trump Appeals to Supreme Court on Financial-Records Subpoena

(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear his challenge to a House subpoena for financial records held by his accounting firm, saying lawmakers are exceeding their authority with a broad probe into his personal and business affairs.The appeal comes in one of three subpoena

Trump turns to U.S. Supreme Court as last chance to keep his finances secret
Trump turns to U.S. Supreme Court as last chance to keep his finances secret
  • US
  • 2019-12-05 17:18:38Z

President Donald Trump on Thursday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to keep his financial records out of the hands of a Democratic-led congressional panel, setting up a major clash between branches of government. Trump turned to the justices after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decided on Nov. 13 that it would not revisit its October decision backing the House of Representatives Oversight Committee's authority to subpoena the records from Mazars LLP, Trump's longtime accounting firm.

President Trump has one last chance to keep tax returns, financial records secret: the Supreme Court
President Trump has one last chance to keep tax returns, financial records secret: the Supreme Court

Could Trump get a more friendly reception at the high court where Two of the nine justices, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, are his nominees?

Leave a Comment

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

Cancel reply


Top News: Economy