Supreme Court Rules on Partisan Congressional Districts

The story

It's no secret that many congressional districts across America are drawn in a way to benefit one party or the other. That's why those who are angered by partisan gerrymandering had high hopes for a couple of Supreme Court cases that challenged the practice.

Decisions released today, though, may then be disappointing. The Court essentially punted on both cases, without ruling on the central questions regarding the practice’s constitutionality. Nevertheless, one of them could still lead to major developments down the line.

Individual rights

That case concerned redistricting in Wisconsin, and whether changes to the state’s electoral map intentionally disadvantaged Democrats.

The Court ruled that the plaintiffs had failed to establish standing in the case:

“It is a case about group political interests, not individual legal rights. But this Court is not responsible for vindicating generalized partisan preferences. The Court’s constitutionally prescribed role is to vindicate the individual rights of the people appearing before it.”

When plaintiffs lack standing, the Court typically dismisses the case, but here it remanded the case back to the lower court to allow the plaintiffs to establish the evidentiary basis the Court found lacking.

Implications

As the National Review explains:

“[T]he plaintiffs live to fight again, but this time they’re going to have to prove exactly how their individual districts are ‘packed’ (too many voters of one party unnaturally jammed in one district) or ‘cracked’ (voters are split from their districts to dilute partisan representation) and then seek a remedy for their specific districts. In other words, it just got much more difficult to seek a statewide revision of an allegedly partisan gerrymander.”

The Atlantic observes that the Court has struck down other GOP-drawn gerrymanders recently, but those cases all involved racial gerrymandering, for which judicial tests and precedent are well established through Voting Rights Act enforcement. Partisan gerrymandering is an issue for which “federal courts are considerably less prepared.”

The Court ruled on a second partisan gerrymandering case today, this one brought by Maryland Republicans challenging a Democratic gerrymander. Without opining on the merits of the case, the Court essentially found that the lower court was right to leave the current system in place.

What’s next?

The Court’s next important decision will be on a consolidated challenge to partisan-aligned maps in North Carolina that were created as a direct response to its earlier decision on racial gerrymandering in the state, with opinions possible as early as this Thursday.

What do you think?

Is partisan gerrymandering a problem? Does Congress need to take action to provide regulatory clarity on the subject? Hit Take Action, then share your thoughts below.

—Sara E. Murphy

(Photo Credit: Mrs. Gemstone via Flickr / Creative Commons)