Fed court voids NC’s GOP-drawn congressional map for partisan gerrymandering

[GMDino]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/01/10/federal-court-voids-north-carolinas-gop-drawn-congressional-map-for-partisan-gerrymandering/?utm_term=.4a757fa968f4

Quote:A federal court on Tuesday ruled that Republicans in North Carolina unconstitutionally gerrymandered congressional districts in 2016 to ensure Republican “domination of the state’s congressional delegation.”

The three-judge panel struck down the map and ordered the state’s General Assembly to come up with a substitute by Jan. 24.

The decision was the first striking down of a congressional map, as opposed to a state legislative map, on the grounds that it was rigged in favor of a particular political party. Redistricting has historically been political and partisan to one degree or another.

While courts have invalidated redistricting plans, including ones in North Carolina, as racially discriminatory, judicial objection to gerrymandering for partisan gain is relatively new territory, with legal standards unsettled by the U.S. Supreme Court. Indeed, the court has never struck down a redistricting plan on the basis of partisan gerrymandering.


Two cases currently under consideration by the high court, one from Wisconsin and another from Maryland, may provide guidance. If North Carolina appeals Tuesday’s decision, the Supreme Court could very well add that case to its docket.

The dilemma for the court, as Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said during October’s oral arguments in the Wisconsin case, Gill v Whitford, is that adjudicating partisan gerrymandering cases will flood the courts.

“Politics is a very important driving force” in redistricting, he said, “and those claims will be raised. And every one of them will come here for a decision on the merits. … We will have to decide in every case whether the Democrats win or the Republicans win.” However the court rules will be perceived as partisan, he added, “and that is going to cause very serious harm to the status and integrity of the decisions of this court in the eyes of the country.”

Tuesday’s decision was made easier for the panel by a kind of smoking gun: Republican leaders in the North Carolina General Assembly openly conceded that the 2016 map was drawn to benefit Republicans.


They hired a consultant from the Republican National Committee to draw the map and excluded Democrats from the process, the court panel said. That consultant, the court said, testified that he was told “to minimize the number of districts in which Democrats would have an opportunity to elect a Democratic candidate.”



“Rather than seeking to advance any democratic or constitutional interest,” the panel wrote in a lengthy opinion, “the state legislator responsible for drawing the 2016 plan,” Rep. David Lewis, openly declared that he drew the map to advantage Republican candidates because he thinks “electing Republicans is better than electing Democrats.”


But that, said the panel, “is not a choice the Constitution allows legislative mapdrawers to make.”

The Republican-dominated House and Senate in North Carolina set out to entrench Republicans and succeeded in doing so, the panel declared. The plan was designed to give Republicans victories in 10 of the state’s 13 districts, and did just that.

Rendering the decision were Judge James A. Wynn, an appointee of President Barack Obama to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, and U.S. District Court judges W. Earl Britt, a Jimmy Carter appointee, and William L. Osteen Jr., a George W. Bush appointee.

The panel found violations of three separate constitutional provisions.

The General Assembly violated the Equal Protection Clause, the panel said, “because the General Assembly enacted the plan with the intent of discriminating against voters who favored non-Republican candidates” and the plan “has had and likely will continue to have that effect,” which it said is not justified by any “legitimate state interest.”

Second, the panel said the partisan gerrymandering violated the First Amendment “by unjustifiably discriminating against voters based on their previous political expression and affiliation.” Osteen dissented from that portion of the opinion but otherwise concurred.

And finally, the panel said the gerrymandering violated the provisions of Article I of the Constitution, which gives states the power to draw up congressional districts, “by exceeding the scope of the General Assembly’s delegated authority to enact congressional regulations and interfering with the right of ‘the People’ to choose their Representatives.”

The plan “has discriminated, and will continue to discriminate, against voters who support non-Republican candidates,” wrote Wynn for the court.

Leaders of the Republican legislature plan to appeal to the Supreme Court, the Raleigh News and Observer reported.

Dallas Woodhouse, executive director of the North Carolina Republican Party, sent out a tweet personally criticizing Wynn for “waging a personal, partisan war on North Carolina Republicans.”


“Once again,” he added, “unaccountable federal judges are attempting to throw North Carolina’s elections into chaos by adopting radical, untested new theories at the eleventh hour. This must be appealed.”


The state’s Democratic Party chairman, Wayne Goodwin, in a statement published by the News and Observer, called the decision a “major victory for North Carolina and people across the state whose voices were silenced by Republicans’ unconstitutional attempts to rig the system to their partisan advantage.”

The redistricting plan was challenged in court by Common Cause, the League of Women Voters of North Carolina as well as individual voters in the state.

(Bolded emphasis mine)

So they admitted they did it...but accuse the judges of being partisan.  They are a special kind of stupid.  

[Belsnickel]

(01-10-2018, 01:53 PM)GMDino Wrote: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/01/10/federal-court-voids-north-carolinas-gop-drawn-congressional-map-for-partisan-gerrymandering/?utm_term=.4a757fa968f4

(Bolded emphasis mine)

So they admitted they did it...but accuse the judges of being partisan.  They are a special kind of stupid.  

Why? There is no federal law against gerrymandering along political lines, and likely not one in the state. They aren't wrong, this is untested waters and it will be interested to see how this plays out. I mean, I can see some constitutional arguments to be made, but they aren't strong where the law stands right now.

[GMDino]

(01-10-2018, 03:24 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Why? There is no federal law against gerrymandering along political lines, and likely not one in the state. They aren't wrong, this is untested waters and it will be interested to see how this plays out. I mean, I can see some constitutional arguments to be made, but they aren't strong where the law stands right now.

I think they are stupid because at least everyone else TRIED to hide behind some other method.  These guys hirde a guy and said "Figure it out so we win more and they win less."  Then he admits that.

You don't find that kind of honesty in politics unless they are especially dumb.  

[BmorePat87]

They need this in MD. Democrats have screwed 40% of the state.

[Belsnickel]

(01-10-2018, 06:25 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: They need this in MD. Democrats have screwed 40% of the state.

Actually just read through a tweet thread on this. This tweet kicks it off:

More to the point of this, it's remarkable to see just how cynically gerrymandered Maryland is (far worse than NC, though Dems are curiously unwilling to grant this). Let's look at some maps, because maps are fun. https://t.co/kx3aHtoMa5

— Jeff B. (@EsotericCD) January 10, 2018

[6andcounting]

(01-10-2018, 06:25 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: They need this in MD. Democrats have screwed 40% of the state 100% of the country.

FTFY

[Nebuchadnezzar]

I read somewhere that Democrats in PA have sued over gerrymandering and lost.

The judge was heard whispering to the Democrats council, "Dude, you have the state because of gerrymandering, knock it off or you'll lose it".

Democrats vow to take the fight to the Supreme Court

[Belsnickel]

(01-11-2018, 01:51 AM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: I read somewhere that Democrats in PA have sued over gerrymandering and lost.

The judge was heard whispering to the Democrats council, "Dude, you have the state because of gerrymandering, knock it off or you'll lose it".

Democrats vow to take the fight to the Supreme Court

That's the thing, this isn't a one-sided issue, but it is something everyone should be concerned about. Gerrymandering along partisan lines allows the parties to pick who they represent. What it should be is the people choosing who represents them. This is a tool used by the parties to manipulate the electoral process and, essentially, disenfranchise people by discounting their votes in some instances. This is why I support our efforts in the General Assembly to make this illegal. I will actually be heading to Richmond to discuss this issue next month. My Outback will have five people in it, and it runs the gambit from a die-hard libertarian to a Berniecrat. This issue is one the people should get behind because politicians in both parties are using to get one over on us.

[BmorePat87]

(01-10-2018, 06:35 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Actually just read through a tweet thread on this. This tweet kicks it off:

More to the point of this, it's remarkable to see just how cynically gerrymandered Maryland is (far worse than NC, though Dems are curiously unwilling to grant this). Let's look at some maps, because maps are fun. https://t.co/kx3aHtoMa5

— Jeff B. (@EsotericCD) January 10, 2018

The crazy one (3rd) now covers the area I grew up in and teach in. The idea was that it hits 4 very big areas of central MD that would never be together to give Sarbanes Jr more exposure so he can run for the Senate when Cardin retires. 

[GMDino]

(01-11-2018, 09:38 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: That's the thing, this isn't a one-sided issue, but it is something everyone should be concerned about. Gerrymandering along partisan lines allows the parties to pick who they represent. What it should be is the people choosing who represents them. This is a tool used by the parties to manipulate the electoral process and, essentially, disenfranchise people by discounting their votes in some instances. This is why I support our efforts in the General Assembly to make this illegal. I will actually be heading to Richmond to discuss this issue next month. My Outback will have five people in it, and it runs the gambit from a die-hard libertarian to a Berniecrat. This issue is one the people should get behind because politicians in both parties are using to get one over on us.

And even the NPR story on it talks about how this isn't a single party issue.

I still am amazed though at the lack of cover up in this one.

[Belsnickel]

(01-10-2018, 10:30 PM)6andcounting Wrote: FTFY

I know, darn those Democrats and their wrecking of states when they aren't the ones running most state legislatures and executive mansions.

[treee]

Gerrymadering is a bipartisan issue for sure. As Belsnickel indirectly stated, it reduces the pressure that the electorate can place on their representatives. This leads to representatives ignoring the will of their constituents and not suffering the consequences for it.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

(01-11-2018, 09:38 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: That's the thing, this isn't a one-sided issue, but it is something everyone should be concerned about. Gerrymandering along partisan lines allows the parties to pick who they represent. What it should be is the people choosing who represents them. This is a tool used by the parties to manipulate the electoral process and, essentially, disenfranchise people by discounting their votes in some instances. This is why I support our efforts in the General Assembly to make this illegal. I will actually be heading to Richmond to discuss this issue next month. My Outback will have five people in it, and it runs the gambit from a die-hard libertarian to a Berniecrat. This issue is one the people should get behind because politicians in both parties are using to get one over on us.

Oh I know this isn't a single party issue, I'm just poking fun at Democrats a little.

I've said it before and I'll say it again that Congressional districts need to be in a grid form and the block shrinks or expands depending on population. No more of these districts that wrap around others, just blacks that shrink or expand.

I know that can be hard to do but it needs to be worked out.

[Belsnickel]

(01-15-2018, 10:50 AM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Oh I know this isn't a single party issue, I'm just poking fun at Democrats a little.

I've said it before and I'll say it again that Congressional districts need to be in a grid form and the block shrinks or expands depending on population. No more of these districts that wrap around others, just blacks that shrink or expand.

I know that can be hard to do but it needs to be worked out.

Truthfully, there are no ways with Congressional districts to insure full representation of the people within them. There will always be people not heard, and there will always be people that are essentially disenfranchised by the shear structure of the districts.

[BmorePat87]

PA's map was ruled unconstitutional. This NYT's article has some possible maps (one fair and one for after 2020 that could represent extreme gerrymandering) and discusses the way the process affects our representation

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/17/upshot/pennsylvania-gerrymandering.html

[GMDino]

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/372352-supreme-court-denies-stay-in-pa-gerrymandering-case-reports

Quote:The Supreme Court on Monday denied Republican requests to delay a Pennsylvania state court ruling requiring the state’s congressional map be redrawn, increasing the likelihood that the map will be redrawn ahead of November's midterm elections.

Pennsylvania is a fierce battleground state, with a half-dozen House seats now held by Republicans seen as competitive.
If the legislative map is redrawn in a way that benefits Democrats, it could help the party in its drive to retake the House. Republicans currently control 12 of Pennsylvania’s 18 congressional districts.

Justice Samuel Alito, the member of the court who hears emergency requests from states, denied the efforts — one from state GOP lawmakers and another from Republican voters in the state — for a stay of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s January ruling that the state’s congressional map had been drawn in a way that unfairly favored Republicans.

The Supreme Court's Public Information Office did not provide any further explanation.

The decision is a significant victory for opponents of gerrymandering, who have also taken the fight to Texas, North Carolina and Wisconsin. Federal courts in those states also ordered new maps to be drawn for the 2018 midterms.

But Pennsylvania is the only state where the Supreme Court hasn’t halted the lower court's decision.

In their request to Alito, GOP lawmakers argued that the state Supreme Court usurped Pennsylvania's legislative authority in tossing out the map.

"Redistricting involves lawmaking in its essential features and most important aspect,” the lawmakers wrote, quoting Supreme Court precedent. “But for the first time in United States history, a state court, in attempting to play the role of ‘lawmaker,’ has invalidated a congressional districting plan without identifying a violation of the U.S. Constitution or a state constitutional or statutory provision providing specific redistricting criteria.”

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s original ruling gave state lawmakers until Feb. 9 to submit a new map to Gov. Tom Wolf (D), who would then need to submit a plan to the court by Feb. 15. If they failed to meet that deadline, the court would redraw the map.

While it’s unclear how the districts will be redrawn, Democrats are expected to benefit from new congressional lines.
Democrats need to flip 24 seats in order to take back the House majority.

Some nonpartisan election handicappers predict that Democrats’ prospects will increase in open-seat races that will be vacated by GOP Reps. Pat Meehan and Charlie Dent. Hillary Clinton narrowly won Meehan’s district, while President Trump carried Dent’s seat in the 2016 presidential election.

Other GOP-held seats that could be impacted by new lines are seats held by Pennsylvania Reps. Ryan Costello and Brian Fitzpatrick. Clinton won Costello’s district and lost by a razor-thin margin in Fitzpatrick’s.

The Monday decision comes after the Supreme Court in September put two rulings on hold that required Texas officials to redraw both the state’s congressional and legislative districts.

And in January, the Supreme Court told state officials in North Carolinathey don’t have to redraw their map yet. The court temporarily blocked a lower court order to redraw the state’s congressional lines by the end of the month, as the case was appealed to the Supreme Court.

[GMDino]

Meanwhile....

http://www.pennlive.com/opinion/2018/02/gop_lawmaker_seeks_impeachment.html

Quote:GOP lawmaker seeks impeachment of justices in Pa. gerrymandering case



Pennsylvania's now threatened Congressional map

181


A Republican House member from southwestern Pennsylvania is pushing for the impeachment of five Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices -- all of them Democrat -- who handed down a judgment tossing the state's Congressional map.
State Rep. Cris Dush, R-Indiana (Pa. House photo)
Rep. Cris Dush, whose district include parts of Indiana and Jefferson counties, began circulating a memo seeking support for the longshot impeachment articles on Monday.

In it, he argues that the five Democratic justices who signed the order overturning the map of the state's 18 congressional districts as unconstitutionally gerrymandered "blatantly and clearly contradict[ed] the plain language of the Pennsylvania Constitution," and  "engaged in misbehavior in office."

The court's order that the General Assembly redraw Pennsylvania's congressional map, which was handed down on Jan. 22, "overrides the express legislative and executive authority, found in Article IV, Section 15 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, concerning the Governor's veto authority and the General Assembly's subsequent authority to override such veto. Article IV, Section 15 clearly lays out the path a bill must take to become law."

Dush's memo includes impeachment articles for Justices Max Baer, David Wecht, Debra Todd, Christine Donohue and Kevin Dougherty.

Republicans in the Senate have separately tried to get Wecht kicked off the case. They have also challenged Donohue's impartiality. 
[/url]
House State Government Committee Chairman Daryl Metcalfe, R-Butler, whose committee would likely handle Dush's proposal, dismissed the justices as "partisan hacks" who'd overstepped their authority.

"The court has ...  early in this court's current makeup, ... showed their partisanship and their total disregard for the US Constitution and the Pennsylvania Constitution they decided to try and rewrite with their recent ruling," said Metcalfe, who has signed on as a co-sponsor to Dush's proposal. "So I think these judges have shown they are not justices at all, they're are partisan hacks that are sitting on the court. 

Metcalfe could not provide a timeline for when Dush's bill might see action in his committee, noting that it had not been formally introduced yet.

On Monday, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who oversees emergency appeals by the states, rejected a request for a stay filed by Republican legislative leaders.

The majority Republican Legislature has until Feb. 9 to come up with a new map. And Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat, has until Feb. 15 to sign the measure into law. If they do not meet the deadline, the court has signaled it will draw the map for them. The court has hired an expert from Stanford University to assist in that matter. 

Republicans have complained that the court has failed to file an opinion that they say would guide them in the redrawing of the Congressional map, where Republicans currently enjoy a 13-5 majority.

[url=http://www.pennlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2018/02/a_surprising_us_supreme_court.html]

Here's the full text of Dush's memo. He could not immediately be reached for comment for this story.

Quote:

Quote:"On January 22, 2018, the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania issued a per curiam Order ("Order") in League of Women Voters of PA, et. al. v. The Commonwealth of PA, et. al., No. 159 MM 2017, holding that the Congressional Redistricting Act of 2011 ("Act") "clearly, plainly and palpably violates the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania" and, on this sole basis, struck it down as unconstitutional. The Court further enjoined the future use of the Act in elections for Pennsylvania seats in the United States House of Representative commencing with the upcoming May 15, 2018 primary election.

The Court in its Order mandates that if the Pennsylvania General Assembly chooses "to submit a congressional districting plan that satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Constitution, it shall submit such plan for consideration by the Governor on or before February 9, 2018." The Court further held that "[i]f the Governor accepts the General Assembly's congressional districting plan, it shall be submitted to this Court on or before February 15, 2018."

"This Order overrides the express legislative and executive authority, found in Article IV, Section 15 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, concerning the Governor's veto authority and the General Assembly's subsequent authority to override such veto. Article IV, Section 15 clearly lays out the path a bill must take to become law.

"The five Justices who signed this order that blatantly and clearly contradicts the plain language of the Pennsylvania Constitution, engaged in misbehavior in office.

"Wherefore, each is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office and disqualification to hold any office or trust or profit under this Commonwealth. I would ask you to please join me in co-sponsoring this legislation."[/i]