Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Michigan​ redistricting commission gets appeals court's green light

Michigan district map

Michigan's 14th congressional district was designed to pack Democratic voters from Pontiac and Detroit into one convoluted district.

mapchart.net

In a huge win for the opponents of partisan gerrymandering, a federal appeals court has quashed a well-funded legal challenge from the right to Michigan's new independent redistricting commission.

The requirements for sitting on the panel, designed to limit the number of even potentially partisan players, were upheld as constitutional Wednesday by a unanimous 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. Republicans maintain the criteria violate free speech and equal protection rights of would-be public servants.

Unless the Supreme Court decides to step in, which for the moment looks unlikely, the panel will be created in time to draw new congressional and legislative seats after the 2020 census. Michigan will be the second-biggest, after California, of the 13 states where at least some mapmaking will be done by such a nonpartisan commission.


Michigan has been at the heart of the partisan gerrymandering battle for the past decade, because it has been a case study of what critics describe as politicians picking their voters when it should be the other way around: A battleground state where the maps drawn by a Republican Legislature kept that party in control of the state capital and the congressional delegation even after a series of elections in which Democrats won almost as many overall votes or even more.

Two years ago, 61 percent of voters approved a ballot measure to establish a commission to take over the line-drawing: four Republicans, four Democrats and five independents.

But the state GOP and other party activists challenged the eligibility criteria included in the referendum, which bars membership by current and former partisan elected officials, party bosses, candidates and lobbyists — or any members of their families. That violates both the First and 14th amendment rights of thousands of would-be commissioners, the Republicans said in a lawsuit spurned by a federal trial judge last November.

"The eligibility criteria do not represent some out-of-place addition to an unrelated state program; they are part and parcel of the definition of this commission, of how it achieves independence from partisan meddling," Judge Karen Nelson Moore wrote in an opinion, joined by Judge Ronald Lee Gilman. Both were nominated by President Bill Clinton.

Judge Chad Readler, a nominee of President Trump, concurred in the result and wrote: "It is refreshing to see the court embrace as a central principle a state's prerogative in organizing its government, including its election system."

Voters Not Politicians, the group created to push the ballot measure, said it will continue to encourage applications for seats on the commission. More than 4,300 have applied already. The deadline is June 1, after which the panelists are to be chosen at random by the secretary of state's office.

"Taking partisanship out of drawing electoral maps is critical to advancing the principle of accountability in government," said Paul Smith of the Campaign Legal Center, which represented that grassroots group in the lawsuit. "Michigan voters want fair maps. They will not be silenced by special interests, who continue to try and exert their will over the redistricting process."

Spokeswoman Tony Zammit said the Michigan GOP has not decided whether to appeal.

Read More

Princeton Gerrymandering Project Gives California Prop 50 an ‘F’
Independent Voter News

Princeton Gerrymandering Project Gives California Prop 50 an ‘F’

The special election for California Prop 50 wraps up November 4 and recent polling shows the odds strongly favor its passage. The measure suspends the state’s independent congressional map for a legislative gerrymander that Princeton grades as one of the worst in the nation.

The Princeton Gerrymandering Project developed a “Redistricting Report Card” that takes metrics of partisan and racial performance data in all 50 states and converts it into a grade for partisan fairness, competitiveness, and geographic features.

Keep ReadingShow less
"Vote Here" sign

America’s political system is broken — but ranked choice voting and proportional representation could fix it.

Stephen Maturen/Getty Images

Election Reform Turns Down the Temperature of Our Politics

Politics isn’t working for most Americans. Our government can’t keep the lights on. The cost of living continues to rise. Our nation is reeling from recent acts of political violence.

79% of voters say the U.S. is in a political crisis, and 64% say our political system is too divided to solve the nation’s problems.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. President Barack Obama speaking on the phone in the Oval Office.

U.S. President Barack Obama talks President Barack Obama talks with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan during a phone call from the Oval Office on November 2, 2009 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, The White House

‘Obama, You're 15 Years Too Late!’

The mid-decade redistricting fight continues, while the word “hypocrisy” has become increasingly common in the media.

The origin of mid-decade redistricting dates back to the early history of the United States. However, its resurgence and legal acceptance primarily stem from the Texas redistricting effort in 2003, a controversial move by the Republican Party to redraw the state's congressional districts, and the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court decision in League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry. This decision, which confirmed that mid-decade redistricting is not prohibited by federal law, was a significant turning point in the acceptance of this practice.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand of a person casting a ballot at a polling station during voting.

Gerrymandering silences communities and distorts elections. Proportional representation offers a proven path to fairer maps and real democracy.

Getty Images, bizoo_n

Gerrymandering Today, Gerrymandering Tomorrow, Gerrymandering Forever

In 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace declared, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." (Watch the video of his speech.) As a politically aware high school senior, I was shocked by the venom and anger in his voice—the open, defiant embrace of systematic disenfranchisement, so different from the quieter racism I knew growing up outside Boston.

Today, watching politicians openly rig elections, I feel that same disbelief—especially seeing Republican leaders embrace that same systematic approach: gerrymandering now, gerrymandering tomorrow, gerrymandering forever.

Keep ReadingShow less