Gerrymandering/Redistricting

“In a democracy, voters should choose their politicians, not the other way around, on Election Day,” said Common Cause National Redistricting Director Kathay Feng. “But the Supreme Court today gave the green light to the most extreme partisan gerrymanders, where legislators openly boasted about their partisan motives, stripping not only the people of North Carolina and Maryland, but all Americans, of the right to fair representation.”

NPR's Ari Shapiro talks with Karen Hobert Flynn, president of the group Common Cause, about the North Carolina gerrymandering case decided Thursday by the Supreme Court. The group is the plaintiff.

The ruling is “a bitter disappointment,” state Common Cause Executive Director Bob Phillips said in a release. “And make no mistake about it, there are victims of this decision. The victims are those North Carolinians who do not have a voice in Washington because a narrow majority of the U.S. Supreme Court has condoned an abusive partisan gerrymander.”But Phillips said he’s hopeful about other efforts to curb partisan gerrymandering, particularly with another pending lawsuit in state court. The case, filed by Common Cause, state Democrats and others, goes to trial in mid-July. It challenges state House and Senate legislative districts by alleging they violate the state constitution.

Let’s be clear, the fight to end partisan gerrymandering does not end with the Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling on Thursday. It will continue in state courts, at the polls, in legislatures and in the streets as citizens fight to make their voices heard and to end partisan gerrymandering that robs them of representation.

Today the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision in two landmark redistricting cases, Rucho v. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek. In a 34-page decision written by Justice Roberts, the majority concluded it could not set a constitutional standard against partisan gerrymandering.