Supreme Court discussing partisan gerrymandering behind closed doors Friday

The Supreme Court is scheduled to return to a deeply divisive issue on Friday when the justices meet behind ...

Posted: Dec 7, 2018 3:46 PM
Updated: Dec 7, 2018 3:46 PM

The Supreme Court is scheduled to return to a deeply divisive issue on Friday when the justices meet behind closed doors to discuss an issue left unresolved last term: when do states go too far in drawing district lines for partisan gain?

The court has never established a standard to resolve extreme partisan gerrymanders, and if it chooses to do so, it could revolutionize the way congressional and state legislative maps are drawn.

Continents and regions

Elections and campaigns

Electoral districts

Government and public administration

Government bodies and offices

Government organizations - US

North America

North Carolina

Political organizations

Political parties

Politics

Southeastern United States

The Americas

United States

US federal court system

US federal government

US political parties

US Republican Party

US Supreme Court

Voters and voting

The issue often divides conservatives, who have suggested that courts should steer clear of such political disputes, and liberals, like Justice Elena Kagan, who contend that courts should be able to articulate a standard to combat a practice she believes "enables politicians to entrench themselves in power against the people's will."

Last term, the justices heard a case out of Wisconsin called Gill v. Whitford and critics of partisan gerrymandering hoped that a divided court -- led by Justice Anthony Kennedy -- might issue a sweeping ruling. Instead, the court dodged key issues and sent the case back down to the lower courts to take another look at a threshold issue.

Writing for a 9-0 court, Chief Justice John Roberts said that the Democratic plaintiffs challenging Republican-drawn maps had not done enough to establish "concrete and particularized injuries" necessary to bring the case. Although the opinion was unanimous, it sidestepped the merits of the case and masked deep divisions on the court. Kagan, writing for the liberals on the bench, agreed the case should be sent back, but in a concurring opinion offered a roadmap for future challenges.

"Courts -- and in particular this court -- will again be called on to redress extreme partisan gerrymanders," Kagan wrote. "I am hopeful we will then step up to our responsibility to vindicate the Constitution against a contrary law," she said.

Impact of Kennedy retirement

One very important thing happened after Kagan wrote the opinion. Kennedy retired.

Unlike his conservative colleagues, Kennedy believed a standard was possible, although he never found one he liked.

After he retired, some critics of partisan gerrymanders lamented that they might have lost their best hope at a judicial solution to the problem.

Rick Hasen, an election law expert at the University of California, Irvine, notes that Brett Kavanaugh, Kennedy's replacement, has not ruled on the issue as a judge.

"But his overall judicial philosophy suggests he's likely to join with other conservatives and hold that courts have no business policing the political drawing of lines under the U.S. Constitution," Hasen said.

North Carolina districts

Friday's case, Rucho v. Common Cause, is brought by voting rights groups and voters who filed a lawsuit arguing that North Carolina's 2016 congressional district maps drawn by Republican legislators amount to an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander that intentionally diluted the electoral strength of individuals who oppose Republicans.

They also say the maps illegally punished supporters of non-Republican candidates on the basis of their political beliefs in violation of the First Amendment.

In August, a three-judge district court panel issued a 321-page opinion and held that the North Carolina voters had the legal right to bring claims and that the plan violated the Constitution.

The court said that the state General Assembly "deprived Democratic voters of their 'natural political strength' by making it difficult for such voters to raise money, attract strong candidates and motivate fellow party members and independent voters to campaign and vote."

Paul Clement, a lawyer for North Carolina's Senate Redistricting Committee argues in briefs before the Supreme Court that the lower court was wrong when it identified a test to strike down the map as unconstitutional. Courts cannot create workable tests for "separating excessive partisan gerrymandering from the run-of-the-mill consideration of partisan advantage by legislatures organized along party lines," Clement argues.

"As decades of fruitless efforts have proven, trying to identify 'judicially discernible and manageagble standards' for adjudicating generalized political grievances is an exercise in futility," he wrote.

But the challengers told the justices a different story.

They pointed to what occurred in North Carolina in the 2016 election and said that Republican candidates won 10 out of 13 seats, even though the statewide vote was nearly tied.

North Carolina state Rep. David Lewis, the co-chair of the Joint Select Committee on Congressional Redistricting, convened a meeting in 2016 and said, "I propose that we draw the maps to give a partisan advantage to 10 Republicans and 3 Democrats."

"When politicians feel brazen enough to not just admit but to openly declare that they are drawing political lines to rig the elections and punish certain voters, we need the Supreme Court to step in and say enough is enough," said Kathay Feng, a lawyer representing the challenges from Common Cause.

The justices could announce its action on the case as soon as Friday afternoon.

West Lafayette
Few Clouds
91° wxIcon
Hi: 92° Lo: 71°
Feels Like: 95°
Kokomo
Clear
89° wxIcon
Hi: 92° Lo: 70°
Feels Like: 91°
Rensselaer
Clear
88° wxIcon
Hi: 88° Lo: 66°
Feels Like: 91°
Fowler
Clear
88° wxIcon
Hi: 89° Lo: 69°
Feels Like: 91°
Williamsport
Clear
90° wxIcon
Hi: 91° Lo: 70°
Feels Like: 95°
Crawfordsville
Scattered Clouds
88° wxIcon
Hi: 90° Lo: 71°
Feels Like: 92°
Frankfort
Clear
91° wxIcon
Hi: 90° Lo: 71°
Feels Like: 97°
Delphi
Scattered Clouds
88° wxIcon
Hi: 91° Lo: 69°
Feels Like: 90°
Monticello
Scattered Clouds
88° wxIcon
Hi: 95° Lo: 68°
Feels Like: 90°
Logansport
Clear
90° wxIcon
Hi: 90° Lo: 69°
Feels Like: 91°
WLFI Radar
WLFI Temps
WLFI Planner

Indiana Coronavirus Cases

Data is updated nightly.

Confirmed Cases: 47432

Reported Deaths: 2687
CountyConfirmedDeaths
Marion11546683
Lake5104242
Elkhart321144
Allen2737129
St. Joseph190866
Cass16389
Hamilton1538100
Hendricks1390100
Johnson1256118
Porter72037
Tippecanoe6948
Madison65564
Clark64044
Bartholomew58244
Howard56557
LaPorte56326
Kosciusko5354
Vanderburgh5026
Marshall4823
Jackson4693
Noble46928
LaGrange4677
Hancock44035
Boone43743
Delaware43150
Shelby42325
Floyd37144
Morgan32731
Montgomery29320
Grant29126
Clinton2882
Monroe27628
Dubois2666
White26010
Henry25815
Decatur24932
Lawrence24225
Vigo2318
Dearborn22823
Harrison21222
Warrick21229
Greene18532
Miami1822
Jennings17411
Putnam1688
DeKalb1604
Scott1607
Daviess14216
Orange13623
Wayne1366
Steuben1282
Perry1279
Franklin1248
Ripley1157
Jasper1142
Wabash1122
Carroll1102
Fayette987
Newton9810
Starke923
Whitley905
Randolph784
Huntington742
Jefferson722
Wells711
Fulton691
Jay680
Washington681
Gibson672
Knox640
Pulaski641
Clay604
Rush563
Adams501
Benton480
Owen471
Sullivan441
Brown381
Posey380
Blackford372
Spencer371
Crawford300
Fountain302
Tipton301
Switzerland260
Martin220
Parke220
Ohio140
Vermillion140
Warren141
Union130
Pike100
Unassigned0193

COVID-19 Important links and resources

As the spread of COVID-19, or as it's more commonly known as the coronavirus continues, this page will serve as your one-stop for the resources you need to stay informed and to keep you and your family safe. CLICK HERE

Closings related to the prevention of the COVID-19 can be found on our Closings page.

Community Events