Federal Courts are rejecting maps- What does this mean?
As of February 15, 2022
We see this happen every redistricting cycle- political parties draw maps that favor their candidates, these maps are rejected by the courts, lawsuits are filed, and redistricting commissions are forced to reevaluate and redraw. This is why public-participatory tools like DistrictBuilder are critical for upholding democracy and maintaining a fair, transparent redistricting process with fewer legal battles. Let’s dig into the current legal statuses of map approval in Ohio, Alabama, and Pennsylvania.
Ohio Redistricting Status
Two maps have been rejected in Ohio thus far. The commission now has until February 17 to approve a new map that adequately reflects the voting preferences of the entire state. The numerous rejections have near implications- the primaries are coming up and if districts aren’t approved, it’s nearly impossible for candidates to plan their campaign. You can check out the recently submitted congressional districts for Ohio in DistrictBuilder here.
Alabama Redistricting Status
The state of redistricting is even worse in Alabama. The proposed congressional map has only one majority-Black district in a state whose population is 25% Black. This single district (which is 67% Black) includes Birmingham, Tuscaloosa, and Montgomery- cities with large Black populations. Ideally, this district would have been split into two districts which would allow for more representation and more Black members of Congress. The map was initially rejected, but the United States Supreme Court overturned the rejection as “it’s too close to upcoming elections to redraw the map”. Many view this ruling as diluting the vote of Black Alabamians.
Pennsylvania Redistricting Status
The story of redistricting in Pennsylvania demonstrates just how much each state can differ when it comes to drawing maps. The Pennsylvania state legislature successfully passed a Congressional map, but the Governor vetoed the map. With no agreement on the map, the case goes to the Commonwealth Court. The Commonwealth Court was able to pass a map, but the Pennsylvania Supreme Court took up the matter, and ultimately the Supreme Court’s decision supersedes that of the Commonwealth Court. Legislative maps follow a completely different process in Pennsylvania, those maps were lauded as being the fairest in decades. You can check out the Commonwealth Court’s map here.
Every 10 years maps are drawn that lay the foundation for the upcoming decade of elections. An unfair redistricting process leads to a weaker democracy where some votes are stronger than others. Public-participatory redistricting tools like DistrictBuilder offer voters a way to have a voice in advocating for fair, equally represented districts. There is power in numbers and redistricting is strongest when more people raise their concerns to ensure a more just redistricting process.
