• Home
  • Opinion
  • Quizzes
  • Redistricting
  • Sections
  • About Us
  • Voting
  • Events
  • Civic Ed
  • Campaign Finance
  • Directory
  • Election Dissection
  • Fact Check
  • Glossary
  • Independent Voter News
  • News
  • Analysis
  • Subscriptions
  • Log in
Leveraging Our Differences
  • news & opinion
    • Big Picture
      • Civic Ed
      • Ethics
      • Leadership
      • Leveraging big ideas
      • Media
    • Business & Democracy
      • Corporate Responsibility
      • Impact Investment
      • Innovation & Incubation
      • Small Businesses
      • Stakeholder Capitalism
    • Elections
      • Campaign Finance
      • Independent Voter News
      • Redistricting
      • Voting
    • Government
      • Balance of Power
      • Budgeting
      • Congress
      • Judicial
      • Local
      • State
      • White House
    • Justice
      • Accountability
      • Anti-corruption
      • Budget equity
    • Columns
      • Beyond Right and Left
      • Civic Soul
      • Congress at a Crossroads
      • Cross-Partisan Visions
      • Democracy Pie
      • Our Freedom
  • Pop Culture
      • American Heroes
      • Ask Joe
      • Celebrity News
      • Comedy
      • Dance, Theatre & Film
      • Diversity, Inclusion & Belonging
      • Faithful & Mindful Living
      • Music, Poetry & Arts
      • Sports
      • Technology
      • Your Take
      • American Heroes
      • Ask Joe
      • Celebrity News
      • Comedy
      • Dance, Theatre & Film
      • Diversity, Inclusion & Belonging
      • Faithful & Mindful Living
      • Music, Poetry & Arts
      • Sports
      • Technology
      • Your Take
  • events
  • About
      • Mission
      • Advisory Board
      • Staff
      • Contact Us
Sign Up
  1. Home>
  2. Redistricting>
  3. redistricting>

Judges have no role in evaluating partisan gerrymandering, Supreme Court rules

Our Staff
June 27, 2019
Judges have no role in evaluating partisan gerrymandering, Supreme Court rules
Richard Gillin

There is no constitutional limit to the use of political muscle in drawing legislative boundaries to favor the party in power, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.

The decision is a landmark setback for those who view partisan gerrymandering as one of the biggest problems plaguing American democracy. Rather than work with new judicial tests for the limits lawmakers can go to in crafting congressional and state legislative district lines for partisan gain, advocates of redistricting reform will instead need to redouble their efforts to drain politics out of electoral mapmaking state by state.


Partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions "beyond the reach of the federal courts," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the 5-4 majority: "None of the proposed tests for evaluating partisan gerrymandering claims meets the need for a limited and precise standard that is judicially discernable and manageable."

The justices upheld congressional districts in North Carolina drawn by the GOP and in Maryland drawn by the Democrats. The ruling also casts in doubt decisions by lower federal courts this spring that held the Republican-dominated congressional maps in Ohio and Wisconsin were unconstitutional

The five conservative justices said that federal courts should defer to the will of state mapmakers because there exists no clear standard to determine when a map is so egregiously drawn in favor of one party that it violates the Constitution.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

The court's four liberal justices disagreed, saying the court was obligated to intervene in cases when the state's majority party has drawn a map for the purposes of maintaining power.

"For the first time ever, this court refuses to remedy a constitutional violation because it thinks the task beyond judicial capabilities," Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the dissenters. "The partisan gerrymanders in these cases deprived citizens of the most fundamental of their constitutional rights: the rights to participate equally in the political process, to join with others to advance political beliefs, and to choose their political representatives."

From Your Site Articles
  • Will Chief Justice Roberts act to save democracy? - The Fulcrum ›
  • Supreme Court blocks redistricting effort in Oregon - The Fulcrum ›
  • Supreme Court blocks redistricting effort in Oregon - The Fulcrum ›
  • Pa., N.C., ballot extensions survive at Supreme Court - The Fulcrum ›
  • The Supreme Court is undemocratic - The Fulcrum ›
Related Articles Around the Web
  • Supreme Court To Rule On Census Question, Gerrymandering And ... ›
  • What Is Gerrymandering? Supreme Court Decision Favors Democrats ›
  • The Supreme Court's Gerrymandering Decision Could Have Been ... ›
  • Supreme Court appears likely to leave issue of partisan ... ›
  • Supreme Court sidesteps partisan gerrymandering cases, let maps ... ›
redistricting

Want to write
for The Fulcrum?

If you have something to say about ways to protect or repair our American democracy, we want to hear from you.

Submit
Get some Leverage Sign up for The Fulcrum Newsletter
Follow
Contributors

Reform in 2023: Leadership worth celebrating

Layla Zaidane

Two technology balancing acts

Dave Anderson

Reform in 2023: It’s time for the civil rights community to embrace independent voters

Jeremy Gruber

Congress’ fix to presidential votes lights the way for broader election reform

Kevin Johnson

Democrats and Republicans want the status quo, but we need to move Forward

Christine Todd Whitman

Reform in 2023: Building a beacon of hope in Boston

Henry Santana
Jerren Chang
latest News

Deaflympians battle for sport & awareness

Howard Gorrell
14h

Voters must hold politicians accountable

David L. Nevins
18h

Democracy has no off-years

Ashley Spillane
19h

Podcast: Harnessing the power of juries

Our Staff
20h

Podcast: Partial truths & corporate fables

Debilyn Molineaux
David Riordan
27 March

Moving beyond passing the torch: Bridging the age gap to rebuild democracy

Dairanys Grullon-Virgil
27 March
Videos

Video: Ted Lasso cast at the White House press briefing

Our Staff

Video: The hidden stories in the U.S. Census

Our Staff

Video: We asked conservatives at CPAC what woke means

Our Staff

Video: DeSantis, 18 states to push back against Biden ESG agenda

Our Staff

Video: A conversation with Tiahna Pantovich

Our Staff

Video: What would happen if Trump was a third-party candidate in 2024?

Our Staff
Podcasts

Podcast: Harnessing the power of juries

Our Staff
20h

Podcast: Partial truths & corporate fables

Debilyn Molineaux
David Riordan
27 March

Podcast: Risky business: More bank collapses ahead?

Our Staff
27 March

Podcast: Talkin' Politics & Religion Without Killin' Each Other: Barbara McQuade

Our Staff
24 March
Recommended
Deaflympians battle for sport & awareness

Deaflympians battle for sport & awareness

Pop Culture
Voters must hold politicians accountable

Voters must hold politicians accountable

Big Picture
Democracy has no off-years

Democracy has no off-years

Elections
Podcast: Harnessing the power of juries

Podcast: Harnessing the power of juries

Podcasts
Podcast: Partial truths & corporate fables

Podcast: Partial truths & corporate fables

Diversity Inclusion and Belonging
Moving beyond passing the torch: Bridging the age gap to rebuild democracy

Moving beyond passing the torch: Bridging the age gap to rebuild democracy

Civic Ed