On December 29, the Commonwealth Court issued a 139-page Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, finding that Pennsylvania’s U.S. House districts do not comprise an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. The decision says there is no way to draw a line between a plan that is constitutional and a plan that is unconstitutional. The decision cites past U.S. Supreme Court decisions on this subject, which will probably be obsolete when new decisions are released in the coming weeks or months. Thanks to How Appealing for the link. The case is League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania v Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 261 MD 2017.

Rhode Island permits write-in votes in primary and general elections, and does not have a law requiring write-in candidates to file a declaration of write-in candidacy in order to have their votes counted. Instead the Rhode Island Board of Elections counts all write-ins for all office, and publishes the results in the “Count Book” for that particular election. The only limit is that the book only includes write-ins for individuals who got at least 5 write-ins for any particular office.

Here is a link to “Count Books”. Click on the 2016 link to see the complete write-ins, starting on page 61. The contrast with Alabama’s treatment of write-ins in the special U.S. Senate election earlier this month could not be more stark.

The Rhode Island 2016 Count Book was just released a few weeks ago.

On December 27, the League of Women Voters lawsuit against Michigan’s U.S. House and state legislative districts moved ahead. The U.S. District Court arranged for a 3-judge panel. See this story. Thanks to Thomas Jones for the link.