Supreme Court rules on gerrymandering

Cover Image
Photo credit Getty Images / Bill Chizek

The Supreme Court says federal courts have no role to play in policing political districts drawn for partisan gain. The decision could embolden political line-drawing for partisan gain when state lawmakers undertake the next round of redistricting following the 2020 census.

The justices said by a 5-4 vote Thursday that claims of partisan gerrymandering do not belong in federal court. The court's conservative, Republican-appointed majority says that voters and elected officials should be the arbiters of what is a political dispute.

"We conclude that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. 

In dissent for the four liberals, Justice Elena Kagan wrote, "For the first time ever, this court refuses to remedy a constitutional violation because it thinks the task beyond judicial capabilities."

She added, "Of all times to abandon the Court's duty to declare the law, this was not the one. The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government.  Part of the Court's role in that system is to defend its foundations. None is more important than free and fair elections.  With respect but deep sadness, I dissent. "

The court was asked to consider when politicians go too far in drawing lines for partisan gain in a set of cases arising from North Carolina and Maryland.  The North Carolina case was brought by Democrats challenging Republican-drawn maps, while the Maryland case was brought by Republicans challenging a Democratic map.

In 2016, Republicans drew congressional districts that packed Democratic voters into the three districts that translated into landslide victories. In the 2018 midterm elections, the map produced smaller winning margins for Republican candidates, but in more districts.

The case also had implications for the state of Maryland which saw its own challenges with partisan map drawing, in this case by Democrats. Republicans in 2011 disputed a single congressional district in western Maryland, held by a Republican incumbent for 20 years, drawn to benefit the state's Democratic party.

The questions before the justices included those of standing -- whether or not gerrymandering claims should be heard by the Supreme Court, and whether or not the challengers had a legal right to bring their case before the courts. On Thursday, the last day of the session. the court vacated both the Maryland and North Carolina decisions and remanded the cases back to the states. 

WATCH NOW: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi holds weekly press conference after Supreme Court rules against Trump administration's census question https://t.co/ssIGZX2HfD pic.twitter.com/N3ZMajuyqq

— CBS News (@CBSNews) June 27, 2019

The cases at the high court marked the second time in consecutive terms the justices have attempted to determine whether to set limits on partisan map-making. 

Both the AP and CBS News contributed to this story. 

UPDATE: Sen. Amy Klobuchar released a statement in response to the ruling:

“Today’s Supreme Court decision gives a green light to politicians who manipulate congressional districts. This is wrong. How we divide our electoral maps should not be political. It should be a fair, non-partisan process that puts the people first, not political parties. That is why I have joined my colleagues in cosponsoring the For the People Act, which would require independent state commissions to draw district lines.
“Partisan gerrymandering undermines the principles of our democracy. Today’s rulings represent a setback, but Congress has the power to pass laws that will eliminate gerrymandering once and for all.”