Maine: Review of Litigation in the 2010 Redistricting Cycle

Maine: Review of Litigation in the 2010 Redistricting Cycle

By EditorMar 17, 2021
Desena v. Maine, No. 1:11-cv-117 (D. Me.) A 1975 amendment to the state constitution required Maine to reapportion its districts every 10 years, starting in 1983. After the 2010 census data was completed, Maine’s two congressional districts saw an increased population differential. Instead of having a gap of 23 residents between the two congressional districts as was the case after the previous redistricting cycle, these two districts varied by 8,669 residents. Plaintiffs, who were residents of the larger district, sued the state on March 28, 2011, alleging that the plan from 2003, which was in effect for the 2012 election…
FEATURES, Redistricting Equal Population, Redistricting Litigation, Uncategorized, ,
Read More
Second State Invalidates Redistricting Map Based on Common State Constitutional Provision

Second State Invalidates Redistricting Map Based on Common State Constitutional Provision

By Michelle DavisSep 05, 2019
September 5, 2019 “the Free Elections Clause of the North Carolina Constitution guarantees that all elections must be conducted freely and honestly to ascertain, fairly and truthfully, the will of the People and that this is a fundamental right of North Carolina citizens, a compelling governmental interest, and a cornerstone of our democratic form of government.” These are the words of the three-judge panel in North Carolina's state trial court. Following Pennsylvania's lead in League of Women Voters of Pa. v. Pennsylvania, which invalidated that state's congressional map - The North Carolina court gave legislative leaders until September 17th to…
FEATURES, LAW, NEWS, Partisan Gerrymandering, POLICY and PRACTICE, Redistricting Gerrymanders, State Laws, Uncategorized, , , , ,
Read More
MD and NC Partisan Gerrymandering Cases Return to the U.S. Supreme Court

MD and NC Partisan Gerrymandering Cases Return to the U.S. Supreme Court

By Michelle DavisJan 08, 2019
On January 4th, the U.S. Supreme Court took up two long-standing partisan gerrymandering challenges on appeal from two federal district courts; one in Maryland and the other in North Carolina.  The question in both of these cases was not whether there was partisan gerrymandering in the making of these maps. Instead it was whether this type of partisan gerrymandering is constitutional or not.  The high court has seemed to duck and weave whenever it has been presented with this question in the past, but this time it feels different. Below is a little background to provide some context for the…
LAW, NEWS, Partisan Gerrymandering, Redistricting, Redistricting Gerrymanders, Uncategorized, , , , , , ,
Read More
Maryland’s Sixth District Ruled a Partisan Gerrymander by Federal District Court

Maryland’s Sixth District Ruled a Partisan Gerrymander by Federal District Court

By Michelle DavisNov 14, 2018
On November 7th, after managing a protracted series of procedural issues involving a lawsuit that was initially filed in 2013, a federal district court panel invalidated Maryland's 6th congressional district on grounds that it was an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander.  Maryland has until early March 2019 to enact a new congressional map or the court will create its own commission to do so. This case is notable since the court overturned the map on 1st amendment grounds instead of the 14th amendment, which until recently had been the basis for most if not all partisan gerrymandering challenges. (more…)
LAW, NEWS, Partisan Gerrymandering, Redistricting, Redistricting Gerrymanders, Redistricting Litigation, Uncategorized, , , , , , , ,
Read More
Supreme Court Keeps Partisan Gerrymandering Challenge Alive in Wisconsin

Supreme Court Keeps Partisan Gerrymandering Challenge Alive in Wisconsin

By EditorJul 09, 2018
Wisconsin - Whitford v. Gill This case had been the one to watch because it offered the court an opportunity to expound on when partisan gerrymandering becomes egregious enough to violate the 14th amendment.  In this case for the first time in history, a federal district court invalidated a statewide map as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander.  However, last week the Supreme Court, unceremoniously punted the case back by remanding it for the plaintiffs to properly show they have standing. The only thing the court did confirm in Whitford was that it would not consider 14th amendment based partisan gerrymandering challenges to…
Redistricting Gerrymanders, Redistricting Litigation, Uncategorized, , ,
Read More
Group Sues Over Louisiana Ex-Felon Voting Law

Group Sues Over Louisiana Ex-Felon Voting Law

By EditorJul 13, 2016
Baton Rouge, LA - Ex-felon voting rights will depend on a turn of phrase as a voting rights group sues to have the state's law barring ex-felons from overturned.  The plaintiffs in the case contend that Louisiana's state constitution only always denial of the franchise for those who are imprisoned, on probation or on parole, they seek to overturn a 1976 law that bans ex-felons of any status from voting. Read more here.
Uncategorized,
Read More
ACLU Warns of Voter Intimidation in Northern California County

ACLU Warns of Voter Intimidation in Northern California County

By EditorJun 17, 2016
California - The ACLU of California issued this press release (below) last week regarding the possible voter intimidation of Hmong (voters whose ethnic origins are from the mountainous regions of China and Vietnam) living in the northern regions of the state. Media Contact: (415) 621-2493 (press@aclunc.org) Since last Friday, the ACLU of California’s Voting Rights Project has been working on a grave situation in California’s northern most county – Siskiyou County – home to a large community of Hmong Americans, hundreds of whom are newly registered voters. We have reason to believe that since last Wednesday, the sheriff and other county officials have been engaged in a targeted voter intimidation campaign against…
Uncategorized, , , ,
Read More