Source: Politics<\/p>\n
The midterm House map is nearly complete. Six months before Election Day, just a few straggling states are waiting to finalize their lines and a handful of court cases challenging new lines are outstanding.<\/p>\n
Several of the legal cases are in large states with many districts and the chance to materially affect the national map \u2014 including New York, where the state\u2019s high court heard an argument Tuesday to throw out Democrats\u2019 gerrymander, and Florida, where GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis\u2019 new gerrymandered map has been challenged. But while more than a dozen states<\/a> have ongoing redistricting litigation, operatives and legal experts say that in many places, the fast-approaching 2022 primaries leave little time for more court action this year.<\/p>\n Ohio, for example, has a live lawsuit \u2014 but also has its congressional primary on May 3. The challenge against New York Democrats\u2019 map is also running up against the June primary schedule. And the Supreme Court previously pushed racial gerrymandering claims about new maps into the next election cycle, staying a lower court order that had struck down Alabama\u2019s map and ordered a redraw for 2022, saying it was too close to the election.<\/p>\n The long-term legal activity means that while both parties are preparing to fight on the House battlefield drawn for this year, they are also getting ready for the conflict over political lines to extend far beyond the normal redistricting period that follows each decennial Census \u2014 with the potential to change the House map significantly over the next decade.<\/p>\n \u201cThis is not a two-year redistricting cycle like usual,\u201d said Adam Kincaid, the executive director of the National Republican Redistricting Trust. \u201cThis is a decade-long redistricting cycle, and probably a four-year intensive redistricting cycle.\u201d<\/p>\n Ahead of the midterms, just two states have yet to enact lines: Missouri and New Hampshire, where there\u2019s been infighting among Republican-controlled state governments.<\/p>\n New Hampshire remains at a standstill over its two-district map. The Republican state Legislature passed a map that would create one GOP-leaning seat and one Democratic-leaning seat. But GOP Gov. Chris Sununu vowed to veto it<\/a>, putting forward his own map that would create two competitive districts.<\/p>\n In a lawsuit over the impasse, the state Supreme Court earlier this month named a special master<\/a> who would draw a map if the governor and legislature can\u2019t reach an agreement. On Monday, state House Republicans introduced a new proposed map<\/a>, although Sununu almost immediately shot that map down too<\/a>.<\/p>\n And in an unusual twist, Missouri\u2019s two legislative chambers are battling over how to draw their state\u2019s map. The state\u2019s eight districts currently split 6-2 for Republicans, but some conservatives in the state were pushing for a 7-1 map. The two chambers didn\u2019t agree on what map should become law<\/a> in late March, with the House rejecting a 6-2 proposal from the Senate.<\/p>\n Kincaid called the state \u201ca complete unknown at this point,\u201d saying it is possible a court will have to step in here.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, other states that have passed maps could potentially see them changed soon due to court action.<\/p>\n The parties have honed in on two states in particular \u2014 Kansas and New York \u2014 where the existing maps may not be the ones the states actually use this year.<\/p>\n In Kansas, a Republican map that shredded the Kansas City metro area and put more GOP voters into the state\u2019s only blue district got overturned by a state district<\/a> court this week, with an appeal to the state Supreme Court up next.<\/p>\n The biggest outstanding case is in New York, where a Democratic gerrymander squeezed Republicans into four of the state\u2019s 26 districts<\/a>, with just one competitive seat in the state.<\/p>\n There, Republicans and some outside watchdog groups are arguing that the map is an illegal partisan gerrymander under the state constitution \u2014 the type of argument that Democrats have used with great success in states like Pennsylvania and North Carolina in recent years.<\/p>\n \u201cThe New York constitution is pretty clear. And so if the New York constitution means anything, then these maps should not be able to stand for the fall,\u201d Kincaid said.<\/p>\n On Tuesday, the state Court of Appeals \u2014 the highest court in New York \u2014 heard an appeal to a lower court\u2019s decision to toss the maps. A decision on the case, which contains both procedural challenges to how the final map was drawn and one on if it is an illegal gerrymander or not, is expected imminently.<\/p>\n Florida also stands out as a 2022 litigation target, though it\u2019s unclear if the state Supreme Court will act against DeSantis\u2019 lines. The governor\u2019s lines create 20 districts that favor Republicans and eight that favor Democrats, shifting the current 16-11 delegation and erasing several districts designed to give political power to voters of color.<\/p>\n \u201cDeSantis is inserting himself into the redistricting process in an unprecedented way,\u201d said Kelly Burton, president of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, adding that the map is \u201cillegal, it is wrong, it is immoral,\u201d and hurts Black voters.<\/p>\n Most other lawsuits are not expected to resolve before the 2022 election, meaning big change could be coming to the maps for future elections.<\/p>\n The U.S. Supreme Court \u2014 which just three years ago ruled that there is no federal relief<\/a> for partisan gerrymandering, kicking most of that action to state courts \u2014 signaled earlier this year it believed that most challenges to maps were too close to the election to be decided.<\/p>\n In February, the Supreme Court blocked a lower court\u2019s order<\/a> that had tossed Alabama\u2019s congressional map as an illegal gerrymander that diluted the power of Black voters. Some justices that explained their rationale supported their decision, in part, by citing the \u201cPurcell principle\u201d \u2014 the idea that federal courts should be wary of making significant changes to election laws too close to an election, which could confuse voters.<\/p>\n Other states, including Georgia and Texas, have similar federal challenges to their maps under the Voting Rights Act. But those cases will not be decided before the 2022 election. In Georgia, a district court judge found that challengers are \u201clikely to ultimately prove that certain aspects of the State\u2019s redistricting plans are unlawful,\u201d but he ruled that the maps had to stand for the midterms<\/a> because there wasn\u2019t enough time to change them.<\/p>\n \u201cProcedurally, the Supreme Court has taken a really aggressive line on when it\u2019s too close to the election \u2014 an aggressive but inconsistent line,\u201d said Michael Li, senior counsel at the liberal-leaning Brennan Center for Justice. \u201cParticularly when you\u2019re talking about claims of racial discrimination and other race-based claims \u2014 race-based claims take a long time to litigate.\u201d<\/p>\n State-based claims of partisan gerrymandering will also likely stretch past this year\u2019s elections.<\/p>\n Ohio\u2019s state Supreme Court has repeatedly struck down GOP-drawn maps as illegal gerrymanders. And while there is an ongoing challenge to the current congressional map, once early voting started for the May 3 primary, it became impractical for any future ruling to change the lines this year.<\/p>\n A similar situation is unfolding in New Mexico, where a state district judge said earlier this month that a Republican challenge to the map was a strong case \u2014 but denied a request to block them<\/a> ahead of the June primary, because \u201cto require a change this late in the game would bring a level of chaos to the process that is not in the public\u2019s or candidates\u2019 interest.\u201d<\/p>\n A GOP move to limit or entirely eliminate the power of state courts to rule on congressional redistricting could also alter the next decade of congressional maps. Republican litigators have increasingly advanced in court the \u201cindependent legislature\u201d theory<\/a>, a reading of the Constitution that state legislators have near-ultimate authority over many election-related decisions, including redistricting, and that state courts have a limited ability \u2014 or none at all \u2014 to act as a check.<\/p>\nWhat\u2019s outstanding for 2022<\/h5>\n
\u2018No one should leave at intermission’<\/h5>\n