Engineering elections? U.S. top court
examines electoral map manipulation
Send a link to a friend
[March 22, 2019]
By Marti Maguire
GREENSBORO, N.C. (Reuters) - Before the
Republican-led state legislature divided their city and even their
college campus into two different districts in a bid to boost the
party's election chances, students like recent graduate Vashti Smith
could vote for the Democratic U.S. congressional candidate and know that
person could win.
Thanks to partisan gerrymandering - a practice the Supreme Court will
examine on Tuesday in two cases that could impact American politics for
decades - that is no longer the case. A U.S. House of Representatives
district that once covered heavily Democratic Greensboro was
reconfigured in 2016, with the voters in the city of 290,000 people
inserted into two other districts spanning rural areas with reliable
Republican majorities.
In adopting the electoral map, the legislature partitioned the campus of
North Carolina A&T State University, the nation's largest historically
black public college, into two separate districts.
"We had one person representing us who shared our beliefs. Now we have
two people who don't really represent us," said Smith, 24, a 2017
graduate who works with voting-rights group Common Cause, which is among
the plaintiffs challenging the new districts.
After decades of electing Democrats to the state's 12th U.S. House
district by wide margins, Greensboro now has been represented by two
Republicans, in the redrawn 6th and 13th district seats, since 2016.
Republicans and Democrats over the years have engaged in gerrymandering,
manipulating electoral boundaries to entrench one party in power.
Critics have said the practice has now become far more effective and
insidious due to computer technology and precise voter data, warping
democracy.
The reworked districts that helped President Donald Trump's party gain
House seats in North Carolina are part of the historic U.S. Supreme
Court fight, along with a single Democratic-drawn House district in
Maryland that resulted in a Republican seat flipping to a Democrat.
In separate lawsuits, federal courts in Greensboro and Baltimore last
year sided with the challengers in North Carolina and Maryland, ruling
that the contested districts violated the U.S. Constitution's guarantee
of equal protection under the law, the right to free speech and
association, or constitutional provisions governing elections.
The Supreme Court's ruling, due by the end of June, could profoundly
impact American elections by either letting courts curb partisan
gerrymandering or not allowing them to stop it.
'THE SYSTEM WE HAVE'
Some Republicans and conservative advocacy groups have rallied behind
the North Carolina legislators, arguing there is no constitutional right
for a political party's seat count to be proportional to its percentage
of the statewide vote.
"That isn't the system we have," said Edward Greim, an attorney
specializing in election law who filed a Supreme Court brief on behalf
of a national Republican organization.
Centrist Republicans including former California Governor Arnold
Schwarzenegger and current Maryland Governor Larry Hogan are
gerrymandering critics, filing a brief to show how the practice
"amplifies the voices of partisans and drowns out the voices of
moderates."
In creating the 2016 map, North Carolina's Republican leaders were open
about maintaining a House delegation of 10 Republicans, joking that they
would have preferred to make it 11 Republicans if possible in the
state's 13 districts. "I think electing Republicans is better than
electing Democrats," state House Representative David Lewis said at the
time.
[to top of second column]
|
Students walk between classes at North Carolina A&T University just
to the west of the line that divides Congressional Districts 13 and
6 on campus in Greensboro, North Carolina, U.S. March 14, 2019.
REUTERS/Charles Mostoller
Using those words as evidence, more than two dozen Democratic
voters, the North Carolina Democratic Party and two groups that
advocate for fair elections sued.
For Smith, the new line dividing her campus along Laurel Street
meant that each time she walked from her apartment to the library
she entered a new district. It also meant, she said, that her vote
was drowned out by her new district neighbors.
North Carolina A&T political science professor Derick Smith, whose
window looks across the district line, said the boundaries were
designed to disrupt a community known for its progressive politics,
dating back even before the Greensboro sit-ins that were a key
moment in the civil rights movement.
"They're breaking up a community of common interest to create a
partisan advantage for the party drawing the maps," Smith said.
The Supreme Court last year failed to issue decisive rulings on
partisan gerrymandering in cases from Wisconsin and Maryland.
Liberal and conservative justices alike have criticized
gerrymandering as a form of partisan skullduggery. But for decades
the Supreme Court has been uncertain about federal courts' authority
to curb this inherently political act.
North Carolina's Republican legislators have said judges are not
equipped to determine how much politics is too much in line-drawing.
The plaintiffs said closing courthouse doors would embolden
map-makers to be even more ruthlessly partisan.
PACKING AND CRACKING
Legislative districts across the country are redrawn to reflect
population changes determined by the federal census each decade. In
most states, redistricting is done by the party in power, though
some assign the task to independent commissions in the interest of
fairness.
Gerrymandering is carried out by cramming as many like-minded voters
as possible into a small number of districts - called "packing" -
and spreading the rest in other districts too thinly to form a
majority - called "cracking."
Greensboro has been at the center of several high profile lawsuits
since Republicans won control of the state legislature in 2010,
ending nearly a century of Democratic-led redistricting that often
riled Republicans.
Republicans adopted a new map in 2011 and won nine or 10 of the
state's 13 House seats in every election since, unreflective of an
electorate closely divided between the two parties. Seats were more
evenly distributed in the past. In 2010, Democrats captured seven
seats to six for the Republicans.
Last year, even though Democrats won roughly half the statewide
vote, they won only three of the 13 House seats. Officials ordered a
new election for one seat after allegations of ballot fraud favoring
the Republican candidate.
The North Carolina case focuses on a 2016 map adopted after a court
found that Republican legislators unlawfully used race as a factor
when redrawing certain U.S. House districts after the 2010 census.
(Reporting by Marti Maguire; Writing by Andrew Chung; Editing by
Will Dunham)
[© 2019 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2019 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |