Court Finds NC Partisan Gerrymander A Violation Of State Constitution

WASHINGTON, DC - MARCH 26:  A Fair Maps Rally was held in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, March 26, 2019 in Washington, DC. The rally coincides with the U.S. Supreme Court hearings in landmark redistricting cases out of North Carolina and Maryland. The activists sent the message the the Court should declare gerrymandering unconstitutional now. (Photo by Sarah L. Voisin/The Washington Post)
Protestors demonstrate against gerrymandering in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in March 2019. (Photo by Sarah L. Voisin/The Washington Post via Getty Images)
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Extreme partisan gerrymanders can violate North Carolina’s constitution, a state court found Tuesday, in a decision striking down the state legislative maps the GOP statehouse adopted in 2017.

The ruling is a major victory for redistricting reformers after the setback the Supreme Court dealt them in June. North Carolina has been embroiled in lawsuits over its redistricting schemes since the last census, as Republicans have held a majority in the legislature — and until recently, had a supermajority — even as Democrats were able to win statewide offices.

A united three judge-panel said that the current state House and Senate maps — which were adopted by the legislature after its previous maps were found to be illegal racial gerrymanders — violated the state constitution’s Free Elections Clause, the Equal Protection Clause, and Free Speech and Free Assembly Clauses.

“Using their control of the General Assembly, Legislative Defendants manipulated district boundaries, to the greatest extent possible, to control the outcomes of individual races so as to best ensure their continued control of the legislature,” the court said.

The court is giving the legislature until Sept. 18 to draw interim maps for the 2020 elections. While the plan should not interfere with the primary elections next spring, the court also said it was reserving the right to move those primary dates if need be.

The case included the files found on the back-up hard drives of the now-deceased GOP gerrymandering guru Thomas Hofeller, who was tasked by the Republicans with designing the 2017 maps. His estranged daughter discovered the files after his death and offered them to a voting rights group, which subpoenaed them for the case.

As the legislature passed the Hofeller-drawn districts in 2017, Republicans bragged about the partisan advantage the replacement map would give them.
The files, the court said Tuesday, provided evidence of Hofeller’s “predominant focus on maximizing Republican partisan advantage in creating the 2017 Plans.”

“The evidence establishes that Dr. Hofeller drew the 2017 Plans very precisely to create as many ‘safe’ Republican districts as possible, so that Republicans would maintain their supermajorities, or at least majorities even in a strong election year for Democrats” the court said, adding it was “persuaded that Dr. Hofeller drew the maps with an intent to preserve Republicans’ control of the House and Senate.”

The GOP legislators defending the maps in the case offered “no plausible alternative explanation of Dr. Hofeller’s intent as he drew” the districts, the court said.

The thorough, 357-page opinion analyzed expert testimony about how several counties in the state were broken up.

It also repeatedly cited the Supreme Court’s recent partisan gerrymandering opinion and dissent. A 5-4 Supreme Court majority said in that case — which included the North Carolina map the state court reviewed — that federal courts could not review maps for extreme partisan gerrymanders. But the conservative majority also said that states “are actively addressing the issue on a number of fronts” and that “state statutes and state constitutions can provide standards and guidance for state courts to apply.”

The state court concluded that the North Carolina’s constitution gave state courts the authority to review maps for partisan gerrymandering.

“If unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering is not checked and balanced by judicial oversight, legislators elected under one partisan gerrymander will enact new gerrymanders after each decennial census, entrenching themselves in power anew decade after decade,” the state court said.

North Carolina’s Senate Leader Phil Berger (R) said in a statement that the legislature will not appeal Tuesday’s decision.

Read the state court ruling below:

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. Oooohh, that’s gonna leave a tarheel…

  2. Ridiculous. Didn’t they pay attention to the Supremes declaration that Courts have no role in political processes…

  3. But the conservative majority also said that states “are actively addressing the issue on a number of fronts” and that “state statutes and state constitutions can provide standards and guidance for state courts to apply.”

    The state court concluded that the North Carolina’s constitution gave state courts the authority to review maps for partisan gerrymandering.

    “Damn you John Roberts…”

  4. Extremely important decision, if this is going to be fought at the state level then it requires thoroughly sourced decisions like this one. Every state can use this as a model for how to examine their gerrymanders, and put limits on them. It’s a process that needs to end, we need elections where the field is fair for all of the parties running, and right now the Republicans are abusing the process well beyond defensibility. If we don’t stop it now, they could institute minority rule for a generation or more.

  5. Death nell to the Republican parties ability to win elections. If they can’t gerrymander they can’t win.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

103 more replies

Participants

Avatar for ajm Avatar for slbinva Avatar for ghost Avatar for mrdependable Avatar for rollinnolan Avatar for losamigos Avatar for irasdad Avatar for tomdibble Avatar for inversion Avatar for sparrowhawk Avatar for joelopines Avatar for shystr Avatar for nemo Avatar for kitty Avatar for leftcoaster Avatar for fiftygigs Avatar for darrtown Avatar for castor_troy Avatar for tpr Avatar for maximus Avatar for godwit Avatar for txlawyer Avatar for randome Avatar for n_b

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: