On November 14, Congresswoman Adelita Grijalva and the state of Arizona voluntarily dismissed the lawsuit filed in October over her delay in being sworn in to Congress. She was sworn in on November 12.
12
Courthouse News Service says here that the Republican challenge to the new California U.S. House district boundaries is unlikely to win.
The Indiana Business Journal has this op-ed criticizing Indiana ballot access rules, and explaining why the onerous petition requirements were created in 1980.
On November 13, the U.S. Department of Justice asked to intervene in the federal lawsuit over the new California U.S. House district boundaries. It seeks to intervene on the side of the Republican plaintiffs who are suing to block the new districts approved by the voters last week. Tangipa v Newsom, c.d., 2:25cv-10616. The Defendants do not oppose the motion. Also, on November 12, the court allowed the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee to intervene on the side of the state of California.
The Republican plaintiffs argue that the new boundaries are a racial gerrymander, and point to statements made by proponents of the new districts that the reason for the new districts is to increase Hispanic representation. This seems an unconvincing argument. The evidence appears overwhelming that the true motivation for the new districts was to advance the partisan interests of the Democratic Party. It is a partisan gerrymander, not a racial gerrymander.
On November 12, the Arkansas Supreme Court refused to stay the order of two lower courts that had said the Governor can’t delay two special legislative elections until June 2026. See this story. The Supreme Court also refused to expedite the Governor’s appeal. This suggests that when the Supreme Court hears the Governor’s appeal, it will uphold the lower courts.