National: It’s Probably Not Possible To End Gerrymandering | FiveThirtyEight

Gerrymandering was once only the concern of map drawers and politics nerds. Most people didn’t know who their congressional representatives were, let alone the contours of their districts. But gerrymandering is having a moment. People don’t like it, and they want it fixed. It’s easy to understand why. As we’ve mentioned before, gerrymandering takes the blame for partisan polarization, uncompetitive elections, marginalizing minorities and rigging elections in favor of one party or the other. If you could solve those things by ending gerrymandering, why wouldn’t you?

Maryland: Senate to consider overriding redistricting pact veto | Herald Mail

Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan’s veto of a redistricting measure passed last year could be the subject of an override vote Friday in the state Senate. The legislation would set up a commission to redraw congressional district lines after the federal census is conducted — but only if New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Virginia also adopt similar legislation. Hogan, who has made redistricting reform a priority of his administration, called the measure “a phony bill masquerading as redistricting reform” when he vetoed it last year. “It was nothing more than a political ploy designed with one purpose — to ensure that real redistricting reform would never actually happen in Maryland,” he said.

North Carolina: Court ruling adds uncertainty to North Carolina elections | Charlotte Observer

The potentially landmark ruling that struck down North Carolina congressional districts adds more uncertainty for candidates – and voters – barely a month before the official start of election season. The ruling Tuesday from a federal three-judge panel also carries national implications and continues more than a decade of court intervention in the drawing of North Carolina election districts. It leaves the boundaries for the state’s 13 congressional districts uncertain ahead of the Feb. 12 start of candidate filing. “Since the 2010 (U.S.) Census we’ve had seven, now eight years of perpetual redistricting,” said Andy Yates, a Republican political consultant. “This constant flux is not good for anybody.”

North Carolina: North Carolina’s Novel Anti-Partisan-Gerrymander Ruling | The Atlantic

Federal judges have yet again struck down North Carolina’s congressional districts as an unconstitutional gerrymander, dealing Republicans a blow and throwing the state’s maps into chaos just months before a pivotal midterm election. A three-judge panel, including one circuit-court judge and two district-court judges, ruled Tuesday evening that the Old North State’s redistricting plan relied too heavily on partisan affiliation in drawing constituencies, violating citizens’ rights under the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, the First Amendment, and Article I of the Constitution. The decision is the first time a federal court has ever struck down a redistricting plan as a partisan gerrymander. The final word, however, will likely come from the Supreme Court, which is considering two partisan-gerrymandering cases.

Ohio: Ohio Republicans propose changes to congressional redistricting; Democrats say it won’t end gerrymandering | Cleveland Plain Dealer

State lawmakers would still draw congressional districts, but would need bipartisan support to approve a map under a GOP proposal unveiled Wednesday morning. Sen. Matt Huffman, the Lima Republican behind the proposal, said requiring minority-party votes and setting new rules for how districts could be drawn are improvements over the current process. But Democrats and redistricting-reform advocates say the plan still allows for too much political maneuvering by the majority party. The Fair Districts = Fair Elections coalition plans to move forward with its proposed constitutional amendment.

North Carolina: Judges order overhaul of North Carolina’s partisan congressional districts | Reuters

A three-judge federal panel ordered congressional districts in North Carolina to be redrawn ahead of the 2018 elections, ruling on Tuesday that the current Republican-drawn map was illegal and unconstitutionally partisan. The judges said the state legislator responsible for the 2016 map had said he drew it to give Republican candidates an advantage. “But that is not a choice the Constitution allows legislative map drawers to make,” the court said. Ralph Hise, North Carolina’s state Senate Redistricting Chairman, said through a spokeswoman that lawmakers would appeal.

North Carolina: Redistricting cases cost taxpayers $5.6 million | The Courier Tribune

The General Assembly has spent almost $5.6 million defending against a continuing series of lawsuits attacking the legislature’s redistricting efforts. And that tab, the official tally through Dec. 18, is sure to keep climbing as lawsuits filed since the Republican-led body’s 2011 redistricting for both state and federal offices continue grinding toward a conclusion, hopefully in time for this year’s elections. Candidate filing starts Feb. 12. In fact, several days before Christmas, attorneys who filed one of the original lawsuits against the General Assembly’s congressional redistricting efforts in 2011 were awarded nearly $1.4 million in legal fees from state coffers for their successful claims of racial gerrymandering, apparently bringing the state’s running tally for the cost of redistricting lawsuits to about $7 million.

North Carolina: Redistricting hearing signals coming end to map-making saga | WRAL

A long legal saga over North Carolina’s state legislative maps drew near an end Friday as a panel of federal judges heard closing arguments over which version of those maps to use during this year’s statehouse elections. The panel’s decision should come soon. Filing in state legislative races begins Feb. 12, and without finished maps, a number of incumbents and potential challengers, including some in Wake County, won’t know in which districts they’re running. There’s also the prospect of another appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which could come quickly following the lower court’s decision.

Editorials: Two Ways of Looking at Gerrymandering | Linda Greenhouse/The New York Times

Even though Doug Jones won a famous statewide victory in last month’s Alabama Senate race, he actually lost — less famously — to Roy Moore in six of the state’s seven congressional districts. That’s right: He carried only the heavily black Seventh Congressional District, into which the Alabama Legislature has jammed almost a third of the state’s African-American population while making sure that the rest of the districts remain safely white and Republican. That’s gerrymandering in the raw. Something equally raw, although less overtly racial, happened in Maryland back in 2011, when the overwhelmingly Democratic State Legislature decided that two Republicans out of Maryland’s eight-member congressional delegation was at least one Republican too many. The 2010 census required the state to shrink the majority-Republican Sixth District by 10,000 people in order to restore one-person, one-vote equality among the districts. Seeing its opportunity for some major new line-drawing, the Legislature conducted a population transfer. It moved 66,417 Republican voters out of the district while moving into it 24,460 Democratic voters from safely Democratic adjoining districts, a swing of more than 90,000 votes. And guess what? The 20-year Republican incumbent, Roscoe Bartlett, lost the 2012 election to the Democratic candidate, John Delaney, who has won re-election ever since.

North Carolina: Altered Legislative Districts Back in Court | Associated Press

North Carolina legislative districts drawn up by Republicans are back in court as federal judges decide whether to accept proposed boundary changes from the third-party expert they appointed. The three-judge panel scheduled a hearing Friday in Greensboro to listen to why a Stanford University law professor they hired as a special master redrew boundaries the way he did. The judges appointed Nathaniel Persily because they were concerned new state House and Senate maps approved by the GOP-controlled legislature last summer failed to remove unlawful racial bias from four districts. House and Senate districts drawn by Republican legislators have been challenged in courts since 2011.

Texas: What to expect in Texas’ voting rights court fights in 2018 | The Texas Tribune

As far as court battles go, 2017 was a busy year on the voting rights front in Texas — and 2018 will likely be no different. After years of litigation, Texas and its legal foes — minority and civil rights groups and voters of color — begin the year waiting on the courts to rule on the fate of the state’s embattled political maps and voter identification requirements. Federal judges are also expected to have the final word on whether lawmakers intentionally discriminated against Texans of color in drawing up both measures. There’s no saying whether the cases will be resolved in 2018. But as the sides await a final resolution years after the measures were first enacted, the attention will ultimately fall on whether Texas will be placed back under federal oversight of its election laws.

North Carolina: How far into 2018 before North Carolina knows shape of election districts in gerrymander case? | News & Observer

As 2017 drew to a close, an often repeated phrase among observers of North Carolina politics was the only thing certain about the 2018 elections was uncertainty. With the filing period for candidates seeking state House and Senate seats set to open in mid-February, the lines for the election districts remain unclear. North Carolina lawmakers have canceled primaries for all judicial races and continue to weigh new options for how judges at all levels of state court get to the bench. Answers to some of the lingering questions might emerge early in January as federal judges hold hearings on a case that will determine the shape of election district maps for state legislative races.

Pennsylvania: Judge Says Pennsylvania Election Districts Give Republicans an Edge, but Are Not Illegal | The New York Times

A Pennsylvania judge said Friday the state’s Congressional districts were drawn to give Republicans an advantage, but they did not violate the state Constitution, ruling in a high-profile gerrymandering case with the potential to have major consequences on the 2018 midterm elections. Judge P. Kevin Brobson of Commonwealth Court in Harrisburg noted that Republicans hold 13 out of 18 Congressional seats in Pennsylvania, a perennial swing state that has one of the most extensively gerrymandered maps in the country. Nonetheless, the judge said that Democrats who brought suit had failed to articulate a legal “standard” for creating nonpartisan maps.

Michigan: Federal judge orders panel to hear gerrymandering case | The Detroit News

A federal judge has approved the creation of a three-judge panel to hear a lawsuit alleging Michigan’s political districts are unconstitutionally drawn to favor strong Republican majorities in the Legislature and Congress. U.S. District Judge Denise Page Hood signed an order Wednesday allowing a three-judge panel to hear the case after former Michigan Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer filed the lawsuit last Friday on behalf of the League of Women Voters and other Democrats, including former state Reps. Rashida Tlaib and Fred Durhal Jr. of Detroit.

Ohio: Ohio Joins Wave Of States Trying To Erase Gerrymandering | WOSU

Five years ago, few people in Ohio were paying close attention to the claim that political consultants – armed with partisan power, increasingly sophisticated computer technology and big data – were in a position to hijack democracy. Critics like Carrie Davis of the League of Women Voters looked at Congressional maps, drawn largely in secrecy by Republican state lawmakers, and issued a warning. “Voters are ignored and made to feel as if their voice doesn’t count,” Davis said. “Communities are carved up so that they don’t have a Congress-person who truly represents them. Members of Congress are frequently threatened with being ‘primaried’ by the extremes of their own party.” But voters repeatedly turned down proposals to change the system. That may be changing – not just in Ohio, but around the country.

Michigan: Federal suit alleges GOP ‘gerrymandering’ in Michigan | The Detroit News

A new federal lawsuit alleges political district maps drawn by Michigan’s Republican-led Legislature discriminate against Democratic voters to protect GOP majorities at the state Capitol and in Congress. Former Michigan Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer filed the suit Friday on behalf of the Michigan League of Women Voters and various Democrats, including former state Reps. Rashida Tlaib and Fred Durhal Jr. of Detroit. The complaint contends 2011 maps drawn by Republicans represent a “particularly egregious example of party gerrymandering,” whereby a party in power draws districts to give itself an advantage in elections.

Indiana: State senator proposing redistricting plan for Indiana | Tristate

What if you could have a direct hand in how Indiana’s legislative districts are drawn? One state senator claims he wants to tear the current map up with a redistricting reform bill. State Senator John Ruckelshaus said his plan tries to make the process as transparent as possible and creates and independent commission that will draw the maps. Traditionally, Ruckelshaus said the legislature draws up and votes on the district maps after the Federal Census. “The way this would be different is, the public can apply through their public universities to be a member of this Commission. Then, nine members would be chosen, as well as four members as appointed by the Legislature,” said Ruckelshaus.

Ohio: ‘Gerrymandering Is Really Bullying’: Inside Ohio’s Attempts To Reform Redistricting | WOSU

On election night two years ago, Catherine Turcer of Common Cause Ohio couldn’t have been more thrilled. “It’s like Christmas,” Turcer said. “I got the best present, and the thing that’s exciting is that this is for all of us.”  “This” was an Ohio constitutional amendment to create a seven-member bipartisan redistricting commission. Previously, Ohio saw citizen-backed ballot issues on redistricting that were rejected by voters. But finally, in 2015, this one passed with more than 70 percent of the vote – likely because both Democratic and Republican lawmakers also supported it. One problem: The amendment applied only to state House and state Senate districts. Advocates said Congressional redistricting was next: The current Ohio map has been called one of the most gerrymandered in the country.

Editorials: Ohio redistricting reform can work – if the rules are tight | Cleveland Plain Dealer

The General Assembly appears poised to propose bipartisan changes in how Ohio draws congressional districts. Good. Ohioans are fed up with the toxic congressional gridlock that results in part from U.S. House districts drawn to protect incumbents, a process that also can yield extreme partisan representation. The determination by Ohio legislators to reshape redistricting is a sign of progress, but, to be adequate, a legislative plan must have genuine safeguards. These include ironclad requirements for districts that are compact and fair, keeping communities as intact as possible. And to win support, a legislative plan must have full bipartisan buy-in, including over federally required protections for Ohio’s African-American voters.

Michigan: Redistricting initiative likely headed for ballot | The Hill

Supporters of a proposed measure that would change the way Michigan draws its political boundaries on Monday turned in hundreds of thousands of signatures to qualify the initiative for next year’s ballot. The initiative would take the power to draw political boundaries out of the hands of Michigan’s state legislature. Instead, an independent commission made up of four Democrats, four Republicans and five independents would draw legislative and congressional district lines every ten years. Staffers and volunteers — including one dressed as Santa — for the group Voters Not Politicians said they were turning in 188 boxes containing more than 425,000 signatures to the state Bureau of Elections. 

North Carolina: Plaintiffs’ lawyers object to expert in redistricting case | Greensboro News & Record

Lawyers for 31 voters suing Republican legislative leaders over racially biased election districts are questioning the other side’s plan for a California political scientist and demographer to testify at a hearing next month. They argue that redistricting consultant Douglas Johnson of Glendale, Calif., should not be allowed to take the stand on Jan. 5 because he has not met a basic, federal requirement that such expert witnesses must file a report in advance covering “all opinions the witness will express and the basis and reasons for them.” “Because legislative defendants have not produced a report for Dr. Johnson, he should not be permitted to offer expert testimony on Jan. 5,” voter lawyers Allison Riggs of Durham and Edwin Speas of Raleigh contend. “Should the court allow him to testify, plaintiffs request that he be ordered to produce a report and be available for deposition prior to Jan. 5.”

Ohio: Snakes, Ducks and Toilet Bowls: How Does Ohio Shape Congressional Districts? | WOSU

Ian Yarber, a former Oberlin school board member, considers himself a knowledgeable voter. He lives at the northeast end of Ohio’s 4th Congressional District, which stretches south and west nearly to the Indiana border. But when it comes to how it or any of Ohio’s 16 districts were drawn, he hasn’t a clue. “I don’t really know as to the rhyme or reason for the setting up the district,” Yarber says. “I’d be interested to know.” Every 10 years, after each U.S. Census, the 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives are re-distributed based on population. Then, the states get to work drawing a new map of their Congressional districts. In Ohio, those boundaries are set by the state legislature. Over the past five decades, Ohio’s Congressional districts have become increasingly “safe” for incumbents – because they’re strategically drawn for maximum political gain.

Michigan: Anti-gerrymander group turns in signatures to get on Michigan ballot | Detroit Free Press

 | Detroit Free Presss turned in more than 425,000 petition signatures to the Secretary of State Monday in an effort to recast how political district lines are drawn in the state. Volunteers for the group have been ubiquitous across the state, collecting the necessary 315,654 petition signatures from registered Michigan voters that are needed to get the constitutional amendment on the ballot. With a cushion of more than 100,000 signatures, the group is confident that a review of the petitions will survive and the issue will get on the November 2018 ballot. “The people of Michigan have come together to make it clear they want voters to choose their politicians, not the other way around,” said Katie Fahey, president of the group. “Michigan voters in November will have the opportunity to fix that system to bring transparency and accountability back into our democracy.”

National: This Is How Gerrymandering Works | The New York Review of Books

I first got interested in gerrymandering on that long-ago night in 2012 when President Obama was re-elected. By 10 PM, it was clear that Obama had won. The next morning, I took a closer look at the returns. I grew up, and currently live, in Harris County, Texas, which includes much of the Houston metropolitan area. After Los Angeles County, California, and Cook County, Illinois, ours is the third-most populous county in the nation. Its population, close to 4.6 million, is greater than the populations of twenty-seven states. So I was stunned to see that Obama was ahead of Romney by two. Not 2 percent. Not 0.2 percent. Not 2,000. Two votes: 579,070 to 579,068. I looked for the fine print. But with nearly 99.2 percent of precincts reporting, these were the numbers. (That last 0.8 percent turned out more heavily for Obama. He won by 971 votes, out of 1,188,585 cast.) That made Harris County, by far, the most closely divided large population center in the country. Under a truly representative system, a county this large and this evenly divided would hold the key to the House of Representatives, and thus open one of the doors to national power. You would expect every race to be hotly contested, wildly expensive, and closely watched. They almost never are. 

Indiana: Senate Republicans file redistricting reform bill | Nuvo

Two state Senate Republicans are introducing legislation to create a commission of lawmakers and the public to draw legislative district boundaries following the 2020 census. John Ruckelshaus, of Indianapolis, and Mike Bohacek, of Michiana Shores, said Monday that they are responding to strong demand from their constituents to create a redistricting process that is open and fair. Democrats in the Indiana House and Senate have made redistricting reform a top priority in the 2018 legislative session, which begins Jan. 3. Legislation that would have created a nonpartisan commission to draw district lines died in a House committee in March when Rep. Milo Smith, R-Columbus, refused to call for a vote on the measure.

Michigan: Signatures Submitted for Michigan Redistricting Initiative | Associated Press

A group opposed to political gerrymandering submitted more than 425,000 signatures Monday for a ballot drive that would empower an independent commission to draw Michigan’s congressional and legislative districts, which backers said would make the once-a-decade process less partisan. The Legislature now creates the maps, which are subject to a gubernatorial veto and a possible legal challenge. Katie Fahey, president and treasurer of the Voters Not Politicians ballot committee, said the current system “could not get more partisan. We have people locking themselves behind closed doors to draw these lines for their own favor instead of listening to the people of Michigan and trying to create actual fair elections that hold them accountable to us as citizens.” If at least 315,654 signatures are deemed valid, the constitutional amendment would be added to the November 2018 statewide ballot barring a lawsuit. It faces opposition from Republicans, who oversaw redistricting in 2011 and 2001 and who control the Legislature and governorship.

North Carolina: Gerrymander defendants want their own outside expert | Greensboro News & Record

Republican legislative defendants in North Carolina’s racial gerrymandering case hope to call their own California elections expert and a member of the Guilford County Board of Commissioners to testify on their behalf. Raleigh lawyer Phillip Strach has asked a panel of federal judges to approve Glendale, Calif., political scientist Douglas Johnson and Guilford commissioner Hank Henning as witnesses in a hearing scheduled next month on the latest round of voting-district maps. Strach wants testimony from Johnson, Republican commissioner Henning and Republican commissioner Michael Boose of the Cumberland County Board of Commissioners to cast doubt on recent recommendations from the lawsuit’s “special master,” California law professor Nathaniel Persily of Stanford University.

Editorials: Ohio lawmakers may be trying to keep redistricting power in-house with latest reform effort | Thomas Suddes/Cleveland Plain Dealer

The Ohio General Assembly is heading home for Christmas, but not before signaling one of its likely 2018 priorities: “reform” in congressional districting. True, the legislature’s first and foremost task is getting re-elected, which means slipping special-interest legislation past voters while ballyhooing motherhood and patriotism. But General Assembly members of both parties are said to now agree it’s high time for Ohio to change how it draws its (currently ridiculous) congressional districts. Today’s districts, in politically closely divided Ohio, send 12 Republicans and just four Democrats as Ohio’s delegation to the U.S. House of Representatives. Ohio GOP leaders say bipartisan deal close for congressional redistricting reform.

Maryland: Supreme Court agrees to hear Maryland redistricting case | Baltimore Sun

The Supreme Court said Friday that it will hear a challenge to Maryland’s congressional districts brought by seven Republican voters who say the state’s 2011 redistricting violated their First Amendment rights. In a case that has been watched closely by state political leaders and that has already been to the Supreme Court once before, the seven voters will now have an opportunity to bring their novel argument before the justices: that the redistricting amounted to a retaliation against them because of how they voted. The court heard a separate redistricting case in October filed by Wisconsin Democrats over that state’s legislative districts that some believed could have bearing on the Maryland litigation. Taking the second case suggests that redistricting will feature even more prominently during the court’s current term.

North Carolina: Judge denies legislators’ early hearing request in racial gerrymandering case | Winston-Salem Journal

U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles has refused a request to hold a crucial hearing in North Carolina’s racial gerrymandering case two weeks sooner than scheduled. Ruling on behalf of the 3-judge panel overseeing the lawsuit, Eagles said the Republican legislators were seeking to “impose their own expedited schedule on the court, the special master and other parties at virtually the last moment.” “The court anticipates that the January 5 hearing will begin with a short presentation by the special master as to his recommendations,” Eagle said in the order. “Thereafter, each side will have one hour to present oral argument in support of their position.”