BALTIMORE (AP) — A panel of federal judges has ruled that Maryland officials must draw up a new congressional redistricting plan that isn’t tainted by partisan gerrymandering.
The three-judge panel on Wednesday ordered the state to submit the new map by March 7. Otherwise, the court will appoint a commission to produce a redistricting plan for use in the 2020 congressional election.
Several Republican voters sued over the boundaries of one of Maryland’s eight congressional districts, claiming state officials unfairly redrew it in 2011 to favor Democrats.
The federal judges say the state must redraw the 6th congressional district’s lines using “traditional criteria for redistricting,” showing regard for “natural boundaries.”
Redistricting maps are drawn by the governor and approved by the state’s General Assembly, which is currently controlled by Democrats.
Maybe I’m misremembering things here, but wasn’t the last big gerrymandering challenge squashed because it was based on partisan gerrymandering rather than racial discrimination? And…and if so, how the is this one different, other than being “naughty Blues” rather than “naughty Reds”?
Call me naive, but as long as this criteria is applied consistently I have zero problem with this ruling. I don’t believe the path to undo partisan gerrymandering is through partisan gerrymandering in the other direction – better that the districts be drawn sensibly according to geography.
Along those lines, Michigan’s proposal 2 (to apply clear, consistent and non-partisan rules for drawing districts) was approved by voters last night. That’s outstanding. Getting something similar in every state would be a tremendous boost to democracy
Actually it was dispensed under a technicality as to reserve the right to strike down partisan redistricting as they believe dems might be at the wheel in 2020.
I think all redistricting should be done by non partisan entities.
I also think that districts should have a minimum number for representation. If Wyoming is short folks then their congressional district should include a part of a neighboring low population state.
If we are limited to 435 members, every time California and NY grow and Wyoming (Alaska, ND, SD etc) don’t, the voters in those states are more and more overrepresented.
The Senate already advantages Small population states in the Senate by design, under the idea that the house is the opposite, and represent by population. Capping the house at 435 breaks the original framers concept of balance.
I know this goes nowhere, I could instead live with political contributions must come from the district or state of the office in question. This would kneecap rich Republican donors from purchasing cheap media market Senate seats
As a Marylander, I am OK with this. Would prefer to have a nonpartisan group draw the map and will be calling my reps about it.