IVN Readers React: Seriously, This Is Legal?

image
Published: 06 Oct, 2017
2 min read

Should lawmakers be allowed to draw electoral districts to protect their party from competition? Can the courts rule legislative and congressional maps unconstitutional on the basis of partisan and political discrimination?

Those are among the questions the Supreme Court is considering in the case Gill v. Whitford.

To give you a brief overview, Gill v. Whitford is a partisan gerrymandering case out of Wisconsin in which a group of Democratic voters are challenging legislative districts drawn by the Republican-controlled legislature.

Though the statewide vote is split nearly 50-50 between Republicans and Democrats, Republicans control two-thirds of the legislative seats. A district court ruled that the legislative districts were unconstitutional.

The ruling was significant because it was the first time a federal court ruled electoral districts constituted a gerrymander not on the basis of race or class, but because they discriminated against voters on a partisan basis.

Now, the case is in the hands of the Supreme Court, which could overturn its previous ruling in 2004 (Vieth v. Jubelirerthat there was no measurable or judicial standard for determining when electoral districts were "too partisan."

The majority of state legislatures in the US draw the electoral districts for their state, and whether we are talking about Republican-controlled Wisconsin or Democratic-controlled Maryland, the party in power draws electoral districts to protect their incumbents and maintain power.

By cramming voters outside the party into a handful of districts, they dilute the voting power of minority parties and independents, shut out competition, and distort representation.

IVP Donate

In other words, lawmakers in most states pick their voters, not the other way around. And when we asked IVN readers if legislators should be allowed to draw districts to protect their party from competition, most responded with, "Seriously, this is legal?"

Over 2,000 IVN readers reacted to the poll, nearly 1,400 of whom selected the final option, and no one responded, "Yes." Here is what some IVN readers had to say:

What do you think? Is Gill v. Whitford an opportunity to end partisan gerrymandering?

Photo Source: AP

You Might Also Like

Ballrooms, Ballots, and a Three-Way Fight for New York
Ballrooms, Ballots, and a Three-Way Fight for New York
The latest Independent Voter Podcast episode takes listeners through the messy intersections of politics, reform, and public perception. Chad and Cara open with the irony of partisan outrage over trivial issues like a White House ballroom while overlooking the deeper dysfunctions in our democracy. From California to Maine, they unpack how the very words on a ballot can tilt entire elections and how both major parties manipulate language and process to maintain power....
30 Oct, 2025
-
1 min read
California Prop 50 gets an F
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....
30 Oct, 2025
-
3 min read
bucking party on gerrymandering
5 Politicians Bucking Their Party on Gerrymandering
Across the country, both parties are weighing whether to redraw congressional maps ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Texas, California, Missouri, North Carolina, Utah, Indiana, Colorado, Illinois, and Virginia are all in various stages of the action. Here are five politicians who have declined to support redistricting efforts promoted by their own parties....
31 Oct, 2025
-
4 min read