On April 20, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order in Dickson v Rucho, 14-839, telling the North Carolina Supreme Court to re-hear a case against the 2011 redistricting plans for U.S. House and state legislature. The North Carolina Supreme Court had upheld the districts late last year. Here is a link to the cert petition that had been filed earlier this year. See the maps on pages 16-20, which show the rather neat boundaries of various districts under the old redistricting from the 2000 census, and the very irregular shapes for the same districts after the 2010 census.
The North Carolina legislature drew districts in 2011 with very irregular boundaries in order to create some districts with a substantial black majority. Voting rights organizations then sued, arguing that although the plan did virtually guarantee a reasonable number of districts designed to elect black politicians, the plans actually reduced black voter influence overall because the majority of districts are now insulated from the influence of black voters. The state trial court in North Carolina had ruled against the 2011 districts. But then the North Carolina Supreme Court had ruled that the districts are constitutional. The vote in the North Carolina Supreme Court had been 4-2, with one member not voting.
This development makes it possible that the legislature will be required to redraw some U.S. House and legislative districts. If that is done in time for the 2016 election, that in turn may cause temporary improvements in ballot access for independent candidates, something that occurred in 2004 because of late redistricting. On February 9, 2004, the North Carolina Board of Elections moved the 2004 primary from May 4 to July 20, and cancelled the presidential primary, because the districts hadn’t been drawn yet. The Board also moved the independent candidate petition deadline from June 11 to July 6, which was the latest independent candidate petition deadline in North Carolina history (the 2004 change was only temporary, unfortunately). North Carolina independent candidate petitions are so severe, no independent candidate has ever appeared on a government-printed ballot for either house of Congress. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the news about the U.S. Supreme Court order. Here is a news story.
Glad to see that this is being challenged.
For anyone interested in the backstory, The New Yorker published a great piece on how this all came about in 2011: first, dark money intervened to give the R’s a majority in the NC legislature, and then the legislature hired GOP-loyalists to redraw congressional boundaries: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/10/10/state-for-sale
It is all quite astonishing.
ANTI-Democracy minority rule gerrymander systems are in both houses of the Congress and ALL 99 State legislature houses.
1/2 votes x 1/2 pack/crack districts = 1/4 CONTROL.
ALL of the State/Local gerrymander cases are Art. IV, Sec. 4 Republican FORM of Government cases — regardless of the armies of MORONS – SCOTUS, lawyers and law school amicus profs.
——-
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
I don’t believe in discrimination against anyone based on race. But I wonder, within the next 20 years, if congressional districts in certain Western states become dominated by Hispanic voters, the Courts will Order that district lines be drawn so that White voters will not be excluded from representation from the state delegations? Or, will the hypocritical liberals argue that there is no such thing as Discrimination against Whites? It will be, for those still around, interesting to see how this is handled.
Either P.R. happens or get ready for a Blacks vs. Hispanics RACE W-A-R.
Think Middle East and the Balkans.
Early war stuff going on in the gerrymanders in CA, TX, FL, etc.
—
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.