Leading Off
● North Carolina: In a major new lawsuit that could have big implications for 2020, the National Democratic Redistricting Committee has filed a legal challenge in state court arguing that Republicans' congressional gerrymander violates Democratic voters' rights under the state constitution.
Campaign Action
This suit comes just weeks after a three-judge panel struck down the GOP's legislative gerrymanders based on similar arguments, which is why the same panel has been assigned to hear this new case. However, the main question is whether there's enough time to adjudicate the dispute and, if plaintiffs prevail, put a new map in place for next year's elections.
Should the matter get decided on the merits, plaintiffs would in fact be highly likely to succeed. That's because Republican state Rep. David Lewis, who chairs the House Redistricting Committee, openly admitted in 2016 that the map was a "political gerrymander" in an effort to insulate the new map from charges of racial gerrymandering after the GOP's original districts were struck down earlier that year. Lewis further stated that the map was designed to elect 10 Republicans and three Democrats only because it was impossible to draw an 11-2 Republican majority.
Although Republicans' arguments that partisan gerrymandering couldn't be invalidated under federal law satisfied a majority on the U.S. Supreme Court this June, the state constitution is another matter. Lewis, whom a fellow Republican lawmaker once said "can obfuscate more than anybody I know" when it comes to redistricting, now denies that his past statements are an admission of guilt, but it's hard to imagine a more pungent smoking gun.
Beyond these statements, the statistical analyses that plaintiffs have presented are a damning indictment of the GOP's gerrymander. Furthermore, the plaintiffs in this newest case have access to bombshell documents uncovered earlier this year from deceased Republican mapmaker Thomas Hofeller, further establishing the partisan intent he used to draw the GOP's map before his death.
Yet despite this mountain of evidence, there may not be sufficient time for this lawsuit to unfold. The successful challenge to the legislative maps was filed almost a year ago, but this latest suit comes little more than three months before the Dec. 20 candidate filing deadline for next year's March 3 primary.
It's possible that House primaries could be pushed back and/or runoffs canceled to allow for a trial and the implementation of a new map. (Both were ordered in 2016 after the last time the North Carolina GOP's congressional lines were struck down.) However, such delays increase the risk that the U.S. Supreme Court could step in and rule that it's too close to an election to implement a new map. While the high court is unlikely to overturn a ruling on the merits because the lawsuit is being argued solely under the state constitution, federal courts generally disfavor changes to election procedures close to Election Day.
However, given Lewis' admission, it's possible that a trial won't even be necessary. Using Lewis' statements and the evidence that persuaded a federal court to strike down the congressional map last year, the plaintiffs in this case could seek summary judgment and avoid a trial entirely. While it's not common for plaintiffs to prevail in this manner, election expert Rick Hasen cautions the prospect should not be ruled out, especially since the same bipartisan panel that unanimously struck down the legislative maps will also hear this newest case.
If the map does get struck down and redrawn in time for 2020, it would mark a blow against one of the most extreme gerrymanders ever enacted in the era of "one person, one vote." As we have previously demonstrated, Democrats could gain several seats in 2020 under a fairer map, and North Carolina voters could finally have much fairer districts for the first time since the 2010 census.
Redistricting
● Connecticut: A federal lawsuit challenging the practice of "prison gerrymandering" in Connecticut has survived an effort by Democratic officials to dismiss the case after the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the matter may proceed, sending it back to the district court level. If the plaintiffs prevail, Connecticut would have to redraw its legislative districts to count prisoners for redistricting purposes at their last address instead of where they are incarcerated and can't vote. Current practice typically inflates the political power of rural white communities at the expense of urban communities of color.
● Mississippi: After a three-judge panel on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling in August that had struck down a Mississippi state Senate district for violating the Voting Rights Act, the entire 5th Circuit, which is dominated by Republican appointees, has agreed to hear Mississippi Republicans' appeal in a joint sitting.
At issue is the 22nd District, where Republicans had unlawfully diluted black voting power. That district was consequently redrawn to increase its share of black voters, making it much more likely to elect a Democrat, and is already being used in this year's election.
Even though the dispute is seemingly moot, top ACLU litigator Dale Ho has said the GOP's appeal is likely intended to further weaken the Voting Rights Act right ahead of the next round of redistricting. While Ho characterized the case as "run-of-the-mill," election expert Rick Hasen opined that the suit raises "important, unresolved questions" about the Voting Rights Act. However, Hasen also echoed Ho's fears in noting the "increasingly hard conservative makeup" of the 5th Circuit.
Voter Registration and Voting Access
● New York: Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo has signed a bill into law that will dramatically shorten New York's unusually long deadline for already-registered voters to change their party registration ahead of the state's closed primaries. Under the new law, voters may change their party registration up until Feb. 14 and still be able to vote in a party's April presidential primary or June congressional and state primaries. Under previous law, that deadline would have been this month, long before many voters are paying attention to the elections.
However, previously registered voters still face much longer deadlines than new voters, thanks to a federal law that prevents states from setting registration deadlines of more than 30 days before a federal election.
Voter Suppression
● Iowa: In a mixed ruling, state Judge Joseph Seidlin has upheld a law passed by Iowa Republicans in 2017 requiring that voters show ID to vote in person and present a voter ID number to request an absentee ballot. However, Seidlin also struck down two provisions of the law: one that barred election officials from issuing voter IDs based on driver's license records, and another that allowed them to reject the signature on a voter's absentee ballot forms despite lacking signature-matching expertise.
Both Republican Secretary of State Paul Pate, whose office is defending the law, and the League of United Latin American Citizens, the group that's opposing the measure, have said they're considering appealing parts of the ruling.
● Military and Overseas Voters: The Trump administration recently changed course and announced it would not to withdraw from the Universal Postal Union, a move that will come as a relief to election administrators and overseas voters. Had Trump withdrawn from the 192-member UPU, which has set international postal rates for the last nearly 150 years, it could have cost more than $60 to mail a ballot back to the U.S.
Turnout is already low among many Americans abroad: A study published last year by the Federal Voting Assistance Program found that just 7% of voting-age civilians participated in the 2016 elections. The expense and uncertainty surrounding Trump’s conflict with the UPU risked sending those numbers even lower.
Trump had threatened to pull out of the UPU as part of his trade war with China, since the UPU allows China to ship small packages to the U.S. at a discounted rate, a policy designed to help developing countries that Trump wanted to see changed. Instead of letting the U.S. withdraw, the union reached a deal with the Trump administration that will enable the U.S. to begin setting its own postal rates next July. Other countries with high international mail volume will be able to phase in higher rates starting in 2021.
● North Carolina: On Wednesday, state House Republicans passed a bill along party lines that would use lists of people excused from jury duty in an effort to find noncitizens who are also on the voter registration rolls. However, previous reporting from local NBC affiliate WRAL indicates that such a program could risk removing eligible voters thanks to widespread false matches.
Opponents of the bill also blasted Republican legislators for potentially exposing registrants flagged as noncitizens to harassment by publishing their names online, which could prompt yet another suit against the GOP over its endless war on voting rights. The bill now goes to the Senate, but since no Democrats voted for the latest House version, Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper could veto the bill and have it sustained.
Ballot Measures
● Michigan: In a victory against Republican efforts to thwart progressive ballot initiatives, a state court has struck down new restrictions that the GOP passed using their gerrymandered majorities in a 2018 lame-duck session. Democratic state Attorney General Dana Nessel had previously issued a legal opinion in May blocking the new restrictions, and voting rights groups sought this court ruling to ensure Nessel's opinion wouldn't be overturned.
The invalidated measure would have prevented any group seeking to get on the ballot from gathering more than 15% of petition signatures from any of the state's 14 congressional districts. But because Republicans gerrymandered the map—emails obtained in a federal lawsuit exposed how one GOP staffer bragged about being able to "cram ALL of the Dem garbage" in populous southeastern Michigan into only four districts—the law would have made it disproportionately harder to put progressive measures on the ballot than conservative ones.
The court held that this provision violated the state constitution, as did another provision requiring petition forms to show whether the person gathering signatures was paid or a volunteer. Republican legislative leaders indicated they are likely to appeal, and Republicans hold a 4-3 majority on the state Supreme Court. However, Republican Justice Elizabeth Clement has broken with her fellow conservatives on high profile issues such as allowing redistricting reform to appear on the 2018 ballot.
