Supreme Court Reaffirms It Will Not Protect Voters from Partisan Gerrymandering

image
Published: 08 Oct, 2019
2 min read

With all the news on impeachment updates, a news story that flew under the radar this week was the latest decision by the Supreme Court to punt on a gerrymandering case out of Ohio.

Reuters reports:

"The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday threw out a challenge to Republican-drawn congressional districts in Ohio that Democrats said were drawn to unlawfully diminish their political clout, a move that follows a major ruling by the justices in June that foreclosed such lawsuits.
The court’s action in the case involving a practice known as partisan gerrymandering means that 16 U.S. House of Representatives districts will no longer be reconfigured, as a three-judge panel had ordered in May.
The Supreme Court had put the panel’s ruling on hold ahead of its rulings, issued the next month, in two major gerrymandering cases from Maryland and North Carolina.
The justices in June dealt a major blow to election reformers by saying in its June 27 ruling that federal courts have no role to play in reining in electoral map manipulation by politicians aimed at entrenching one party in power."

As a result of its ruling in June, the high court's decision in the Ohio case comes as no surprise. There is another case pending a decision out of Michigan that is expected to end in a similar way.

It is important to note that this issue is not just about Republicans. It is not just about Democrats. The Supreme Court threw out a Democratic challenge to Republican drawn maps in North Carolina. It threw out a Republican challenge to Democratic drawn maps in Maryland.

But the challenges have also not been to serve the interests of voters, but the interests of the challenging party.

Both parties use gerrymandering and other anti-competitive schemes to suppress the vote of citizens outside their membership. Both parties rig the process against alternative voices and independent-minded voters. The consequence is the very political environment we see in DC today: hyper-partisan, divisive, unresponsive, and unrepresentative.

It is no wonder that movements for political and election reform have so much momentum right now, from ending gerrymandering on a state-by-state basis, to creating more inclusive debates, to ensuring every voter, not just party members, has a meaningful vote in the elections process.

Creating a more competitive, more responsive, and less divisive political environment starts with unrigging the rules that protect the two-party duopoly.

You Might Also Like

Hillcrest
'Build, Baby, Build!' is NOT the Answer to Housing Crises
Can San Diego build its way out of its three-part housing crisis – supply, affordability and homelessness? Some of elected officials think so and are leading the charge. I have been in the real estate industry for 50-plus years, and I say they are on the wrong track....
27 Oct, 2025
-
4 min read
Isn't It Weird That Congress Feels No Urgency to Re-Open the Government?
Isn't It Weird That Congress Feels No Urgency to Re-Open the Government?
The U.S. has entered Day 22 of the latest government shutdown with no end in sight. As pundits expect it to surpass the 35-day record set during Trump’s first term, a new Gallup poll shows voters’ approval of Congress has plummeted in the last month. Yet, for congressional leaders, there isn’t any urgency to re-open the government. House Speaker Mike Johnson and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries trade jabs back and forth in the media, but the blame game continues to be prioritized over solutions....
22 Oct, 2025
-
5 min read
Proposition 50 voter guide
California Prop 50: Partisan Power Play or Necessary Counterpunch?
November 4 marks a special election for what has become the most controversial ballot measure in California in recent memory: Proposition 50, which would circumvent congressional districts drawn by the state’s independent redistricting commission for a legislative-drawn map....
01 Oct, 2025
-
9 min read