Supreme Court will hear new racial gerrymandering case that could have national consequences

Daily Kos Staff

Tuesday June 07, 2016 · 11:25 AM PDT

2016/06/07 · 11:25

Virginia's House of Delegates currently has a 66 to 34 Republican majority thanks in part to gerrymandering

On Monday the Supreme Court announced that it would hear a challenge to Virginia’s Republican-drawn state House of Delegates districts in a case that could have far-reaching effects. Plaintiffs in that case contend that Republican legislators violated the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause by impermissibly relying too heavily on race during the 2011 round of redistricting. Although recent similar challenges to other maps have met varying degrees of success, they haven’t yet resulted in a sweeping ruling that clarifies many unresolved issues regarding when and to what degree mapmakers can consider race.

Virginia Republicans admitted to using of a hard floor of 55 percent African-American when drawing black-majority districts. Plaintiffs argued that the use of such a mechanical threshold without justification under the Voting Rights Act had the effect of packing black voters into fewer heavily-black districts to dilute their influence in adjacent white-majority districts. The federal district court sided 2-1 in favor of Republican legislators and deemed that race did not predominate in the redistricting scheme as opposed to partisan or incumbent considerations. Now, plaintiffs are seeking a different outcome at the Supreme Court.

In 2015 the Supreme Court remanded a similar Alabama case back to the lower court after finding that the mechanical use of racial thresholds without justification was unconstitutional. Just last month the high court dismissed a challenge to a district court ruling striking down Virginia’s congressional districts, but without ruling on the merits and instead finding that Republican officeholders lacked the standing to appeal. In that case the district court struck down one majority-black district and replaced it with two districts where a substantial minority of African Americans would likely be sufficient to elect black voters’ preferred candidates.

Mapmakers have gotten in trouble for relying too heavily on race, but past voting rights jurisprudence requires the use of race in particular instances to ensure minority voters can elect their candidate of choice. As election law expert professor Rick Hasen has noted, these more recent cases have failed to clarify just to what degree the use of race is permissible and what the appropriate remedy is to these invalidated districts. A sweeping ruling could potentially affect many redistricting plans throughout the South, especially where many Republican-drawn maps could have created additional seats that would likely elect minority legislators.

This case will likely be heard after the Supreme Court’s new term starts in October and a new ruling should hopefully resolve these outstanding issues. However, with the current gridlock over confirming a replacement for the late Justice Antonin Scalia, it’s possible that the court deadlocks 4-4 if swing-Justice Anthony Kennedy is not swayed by the plaintiffs’ arguments. Upcoming cases like this one demonstrate just how important the 2016 election is to the fight for voting rights, because it will likely determine future control of the court.

Supreme Court will hear new racial gerrymandering case that could have national consequences

Comments are closed on this story.