The Supreme Court is unlikely to decide the Wisconsin case before early next year.
A recent study by the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York Univesity School of Law found that Republicans were able to secure majorities in the House in the 2012 and 2016 elections largely due to partisan gerrymandering.
Wisconsin's attorney general appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court announced Monday morning it will take up the most important gerrymandering case in more than a decade. Wisconsin Republicans dispute the assertion that they intentionally engineered a biased map, arguing that partisan skews in the map reflect a natural geographic advantage they have in redistricting as a result of Democrats clustering in cities while Republicans are spread out more evenly throughout the state. As I have said before, our redistricting process was entirely lawful and constitutional, and the district court should be reversed. It works by measuring partisan asymmetry - or the votes that savvy mapmakers "waste" when drawing district lines that either "crack" one party's votes and divide them among many unwinnable districts, or "pack" them as intensely as possible into as few seats as possible.
Rep. Peter Barca, Wisconsin state Assembly Democratic minority leader: "Voters should be able to choose their representatives, not the other way around, and I have faith that the Supreme Court will do the right thing to help end the bad polarization we see in both Wisconsin and across America". Denniston has written for us as a contributor since June 2011 and has covered the Supreme Court since 1958.
By taking up the case, the Supreme Court is essentially promising to rule on the merits of the efficiency gap as a means of determining whether an improper partisan gerrymander has happened - and, if one has occurred, on whether that violates either First or 14th Amendment protections.
But of the five justices in that majority, only two, Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Anthony Kennedy, remain.
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker remains confident that GOP-drawn legislative district maps will survive a Supreme Court review. He will be a key vote in the Wisconsin case. In that case and again in 2006, Kennedy didn't find one. He could be the swing vote in the Wisconsin case.
Enter the Wisconsin case.
One can see how this method would make Democratic votes less equal than Republicans votes because, under this map, Republicans won two thirds of the seats with just 48.6 per cent of the vote.
79 missing or presumed dead in the Grenfell Tower fire
What caused the fire to break out remains unclear, but authorities indicated Friday they don't believe it was intentional. On Saturday afternoon, hundreds of protesters gathered in Whitehall to call for her resignation.
If a candidate only needs 51% of the votes to win, any votes over and above that are essentially wasted. It essentially measures and compares each party's wasted votes -those going to the victor in excess of what's needed for victory - in an election.
When the efficiency gap is over 7 percent, it makes it extremely likely the majority party will maintain its electoral majority.
Campaign Legal Center president Trevor Potter, whose group is representing the plaintiffs, asserted that both parties should want to end partisan gerrymandering.
"It shows us how much imbalance there is in the wasting of votes", Burden said.
After a trial a year ago, the district court panel agreed, invalidating the restricting plan statewide.
"That's a message to other states that they also need to prevent partisanship from going too far", Burden said.
(CNN) - Forget Citizens United or Bush v. Gore - the name you want to remember is Gill v. Whitford.
"That would be the law of the land and require many states to take immediate action", Burden said. If the Supreme Court rules that partisan gerrymandering such as this is unconstitutional, then our democracy will be protected from such cases of minority rule.
The case will set a legal precedent on the long-time political practice.
Comments