🚨⚖️COURT ALERT: Lawsuits asking the court to intervene in Minnesota's redistricting process are scheduled for oral argument today.
Here's what you need to know👇🧵
Minnesota hasn't passed any new maps yet this redistricting cycle. The lawsuits filed in Minnesota are a special type of case called "impasse litigation." These lawsuits are filed when lawmakers cannot agree on new maps as election deadlines are approaching.
In most states, impasse litigation is filed in only extreme circumstances. But some states, like Minnesota, go through impasse litigation every redistricting cycle. In fact, MN has had impasse litigation every cycle since 1970.
In Minnesota, the chambers of the state legislature and the governorship are often controlled by different political parties. Since all three entities — state House, state Senate & governor — need to agree on the maps, partisan gridlock can keep maps from being approved on time.
In this redistricting cycle, the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party controls the state House and the governor's seat and the Republican Party controls the state Senate. Voters believe that it is unlikely that they will come to an agreement on maps before 2022 election deadlines.
Based on new census data, the districts drawn after the 2010 census are malapportioned — meaning that the current districts are not equal — due to population shifts. New legislative and congressional districts must be drawn to properly represent voters.
PLAINTIFFS: A group of MN voters
DEFENDANTS: MN Sec. of State Steve Simon (D)
CLAIMS: The court must intervene in redistricting to ensure new legislative & congressional maps are enacted due to likely partisan gridlock.
WATTSON:
PLAINTIFFS: A group of MN voters
DEFENDANTS: MN Sec. of State Steve Simon (D) & Carver County election official Kendra Olson
CLAIMS: The court must intervene in redistricting to ensure new legislative & congressional maps are enacted due to likely partisan gridlock.
Additional groups intervened in the case to represent their own interests, such as the Anderson plaintiffs, the Corrie plaintiffs, Common Cause and others. You can find all of their court filings here⤵️ democracydocket.com/cases/minnesot…
The Minnesota Supreme Court consolidated the cases and created a special redistricting panel to oversee the lawsuits. The panel ordered all parties involved in the case to propose their own redistricting maps.
Today, the redistricting panel will hear oral arguments for the maps. Each party will have the opportunity to present their own maps as well as argue against other parties' maps. The redistricting panel will take all the maps into consideration and determine new districts.
However, the court-drawn maps will only go into effect if the state legislature fails to pass and enact its own maps. Minnesota law requires redistricting to be completed 25 weeks before a primary election. In 2022, the deadline is Feb. 15, 2022.
The Minnesota Legislature will only be in session for about 2 weeks before the redistricting deadline. Given the short time frame and the likelihood of partisan gridlock, Minnesota's maps will probably be drawn by the court.
5 judges make up the special redistricting panel overseeing the case. Judges in Minnesota are elected in nonpartisan elections, although 2 of the panel judges were initially appointed by a Republican governor, 2 by a Democratic governor and 1 by an Independence Party governor.
Meet the judges for today's hearing...
⚖️Court of Appeals Judge Louise Bjorkman: appointed by Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R)
⚖️Court of Appeals Judge Diane Bratvold: appointed by Gov. Mark Dayton (D)
⚖️7th Judicial District Judge Jay Carlson: appointed by Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R)
Judges for today's hearing continued...
⚖️10th Judicial District Judge Juanita Freeman: appointed by Gov. Mark Dayton (D)
⚖️3rd Judicial District Judge Jodi Williamson: appointed by Gov. Jesse Ventura (Reform Party and later Independence Party)
Today's hearing is not the end of redistricting litigation in Minnesota. Watch this space for updates and watch the proceedings starting at 10:30 AM ET here👇 mncourts.gov/2021redistrict…
🚨⚖️COURT ALERT: Federal lawsuits challenging Alabama's congressional map are headed to court this morning.
Here's what you need to know.👇🧵
AL has a long history of racial discrimination & gerrymandering in redistricting. Past maps have been drawn to "pack" Black voters into specific districts & "crack" Black communities elsewhere in the state, leading to Black Alabamians having less voting strength & representation.
The map drawn in 2021 continues to do the same. While Black residents make up over 25% of Alabama's population, only 1 of the 7 congressional districts is drawn to include a majority-Black population and the districts fail to represent Alabama's growing diversity.
🚨⚖️COURT ALERT: Lawsuits challenging North Carolina's new legislative and congressional maps go to trial today. #ncpol
Here's what you need to know.👇🧵
In this trial, the plaintiffs are trying to prove that NC's new legislative and congressional maps are gerrymandered to benefit Republicans and dilute the voting strength of Black voters, violating the state constitution.
First, let's clear up why North Carolina courts can even hear partisan gerrymandering claims. In 2019, SCOTUS held in Rucho v. Common Cause that partisan gerrymandering claims are non-justiciable political issues — meaning that *federal* courts CANNOT hear these claims.
🗳@SenatorWarnock just gave a speech on the Senate floor on the urgent need for voting rights legislation.
Here are some highlights from his speech⤵️🧵
"The American people have been pushing for leaders in Washington to address voting rights...They know their history. They are witnessing what is happening to our democracy in real-time. And they see the handwriting on the wall."
"They see the sweeping voter suppression proposals in 49 states and the dozens of new laws that have now popped up across the nation, fueled by the Big Lie that seeks to delegitimize the voices of millions of Georgians and Americans, who made their voices heard..." 1/2
The court consolidated the two cases, Harper v. Hall and North Carolina League of Conservation Voters (NCLCV) v. Hall, into one case under the name NCLCV v. Hall.
NCLCV: "In all three maps, so long as you have results within 7 points...you are going to have baked in majorities for the incumbent [Republican] party in every chamber."
🚨⚖️COURT ALERT: A hearing will be held this morning in North Carolina regarding challenges to the state's new redistricting maps.
Here's what you need to know about the lawsuits🧵👇
There are two lawsuits involved in this hearing. Both challenge the constitutionality of the new congressional map as a partisan gerrymander. The second lawsuit also challenges the General Assembly maps and includes a racial gerrymandering claim.
Despite the fact that North Carolina is split almost 50/50 Republican and Democrat in state-wide elections, the new congressional map would overwhelming consolidate GOP power in the Tar Heel state with:
🖊10 GOP districts
🖊3 Democratic districts
🖊1 competitive district