Analysis: Do Redistricting Maps with Deviations Under 10% Violate the Equal Population Rule? Sometimes.

Analysis: Do Redistricting Maps with Deviations Under 10% Violate the Equal Population Rule? Sometimes.

Most legal challenges to redistricting maps based on population deviation center around deviations that are too large. However, there are a handful of cases in which a court has found a map with minimal deviations (under 10%) to be unconstitutional. What is minimal? The equal population or “one-person, one-vote standard requires general population equality between districts, but there is no precise number or percentage that defines constitutionality. Instead, the Supreme Court interprets this constitutional requirement for congressional districts to mean “strict equality,” and for legislative and other local maps, districts need only to be “substantially equal.” In practice, a clear…
Read More
Federal Judge Reprimands Census Bureau for Violating  its Restraining Order

Federal Judge Reprimands Census Bureau for Violating its Restraining Order

On Sept. 24th the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California issued a preliminary injunction that enjoins the U.S. Census Bureau from ending its counting operations on September 30, extending the time to Oct 31. On the afternoon of Sept. 28th, despite that court order, the Census Bureau tweeted (see below) that it would be ending field operations on Oct. 5th. Chaos ensued. In a new order issued by the district court on Oct 1, the court clarifies its original order and reprimands administration officials for " further undermining trust in the Bureau and its partners, sowing more…
Read More

NY Federal Court Enjoins Presidential Order to Remove Illegal Immigrants from Apportionment Count

A federal court panel is the first to decide on whether the president's memorandum directing the U.S. Census Bureau to report the estimated number of “aliens who are not in a lawful immigration status” is unlawful. The memo's stated purpose is to subtract this estimate from the total population in each state - the number that is historically used to apportion congressional seats among the states. Read the opinion here. Officials Enjoined: The court enjoined all of the officials who were party to the lawsuit from reporting the estimate in the official apportionment report. The court did acknowledge, however, that…
Read More
Watch: House Judiciary Committee Hearing on  Voting Discrimination

Watch: House Judiciary Committee Hearing on Voting Discrimination

Date: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 - 10:00am Location: 2141 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515 The U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary heard testimony regarding evidence of current and ongoing voting discrimination. Witnesses included: Mr. Derrick Johnson ,President and CEO, NAACP Ms. Vanita Gupta ,President and CEO, Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights J. Christian Adams, President and General Counsel, Public Interest Legal Foundation Mr. Dale Ho, Director, Voting Rights Project, American Civil Liberties Union Ms. Myrna Perez, Director, Voting Rights and Elections Program, Brennan Center for Justice Ms. Natalie A. Landreth, Senior Staff Attorney, Native American Rights Fund https://youtu.be/VoRQ6-CD7Yc?t=1837
Read More
Listen to Supreme Court Oral Argument in the Maryland Partisan Gerrymandering Case

Listen to Supreme Court Oral Argument in the Maryland Partisan Gerrymandering Case

On March 26, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Benesik v. Lamone, a partisan gerrymandering case from Maryland. Click here for background on this case and its companion case, Rucho v. Common Cause (North Carolina). For a pre oral symposium hosted by SCOTUSBlog, click here. Click here to listen to oral argument for Rucho v. Common Cause.
Read More
SCOTUSblog Symposium in Anticipation of Oral Arguments in Partisan Gerrymandering Cases

SCOTUSblog Symposium in Anticipation of Oral Arguments in Partisan Gerrymandering Cases

. The Supreme Court will hear oral argument in two key partisan gerrymandering cases on March 26; one from Maryland (Benesik v. Lamone) and one from North Carolina (Rucho v. Common Cause). In preparation for these arguments, the editors at SCOTUSblog hosted this pre-argument symposium featuring a group of experts on redistricting law. Here is a quick summary of each contributor's essay. You can click to read each article in full. . Justin Levitt: Suggests that the unconstitutionality of excessive partisan gerrymandering follows from the fact that there is widespread agreement (in the legal community) that any State law that…
Read More
Listen to the NCSL Webinar on Recent Supreme Court Gerrymandering Decisions

Listen to the NCSL Webinar on Recent Supreme Court Gerrymandering Decisions

Last week the National Conference of State Legislatures hosted this webinar on the recent Supreme Court Partisan Gerrymandering decisions.  You can watch/listen below.  The discussion gives good insight into the current posture of the litigation in Wisconsin and Maryland and other states.  (more…)
Read More
NPR and Scotusblog Recap Oral Arguments in Racial Gerrymandering Case

NPR and Scotusblog Recap Oral Arguments in Racial Gerrymandering Case

Wash. DC - NPR's Nina Totenberg recaps Supreme Court oral arguments in , Bethune-Hill v. Virginia State Board of Elections and McCrory v. Harris;  the racial gerrymandering claims arising from the Virginia state legislative and the North Carolina congressional map, which were heard on Monday.  Click below for audio. Read Scotusblog's analysis here.    
Read More
NPR Talks with Law Profs About Racial Gerrymandering in the Supreme Court

NPR Talks with Law Profs About Racial Gerrymandering in the Supreme Court

Wash. DC - NPR's Nina Totenberg discusses the North Carolina racial gerrymandering claim to be heard today before the U.S. Supreme Court.  Totenberg chats with Stanford law professor Nathaniel Persily and Richard Hasen of University of California Irvine about the two congressional districts in dispute and how the court has dealt with similar claims in the past. Click below.      
Read More
Packing Minorities Into Districts. When Is That Ever Okay?

Packing Minorities Into Districts. When Is That Ever Okay?

Washington DC - The Supreme Court will tackle that question today as it hears oral arguments in two redistricting cases.  Both cases are alleged racial gerrymander claims; one orginating from Virginia's state legislative map and the other from North Carolina's congressional district map.  (more…)
Read More