Skip to main content

Sign up for our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

"Gerrymandering has become so aggressive, extreme, and effective that there is an urgent need for the Supreme Court to finally step in and set boundaries," said Wendy Weiser, director of the Brennan Center for Justice's Democracy Program. (Photo: Jonathan Ernst/ Reuters)

'Historic Opportunity': Supreme Court to Hear Partisan Gerrymandering Case

"Politicians should not be choosing their voters, voters should be choosing their politicians," said Karen Hobert Flynn, president of Common Cause

Jake Johnson

In a move that has the potential to "set a landmark precedent," the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday announced it will hear a Wisconsin gerrymandering case alleging the Republican-controlled legislature drew congressional disticts in a way that illegally discriminates against Democratic candidates and voters.

"This is a historic opportunity to address one of the biggest problems facing our electoral system."
—Wendy Weiser, director of the Brennan Center for Justice's Democracy Program

The plaintiffs in the case—a dozen Wisconsin residents—argue "Republican legislative leaders authorized a secretive and exclusionary mapmaking process aimed at securing for their party a large advantage that would persist no matter what happened in future elections."

Recent high-profile gerrymandering cases have focused primarily on the racial impact of redistricting. In May, the Supreme Court deemed North Carolina's map unconstitutional on the grounds that district lines were drawn with the intention of "reducing the voting power of minorities," as Mother Jones put it.

Currently, however, there are several cases—in Pennsylvania and Maryland, for instance—in which partisan redistricting is the center of attention.

Given the impact gerrymandering has had on recent elections, the Wisconsin case is being hailed as potentially "revolutionary," one that could have "massive implications for redistricting and political power in America."

Last November, a panel of federal judges ruled 2-1 that Wisconsin Republicans in 2011 designed the congressional map to "make it more difficult for Democrats, compared to Republicans, to translate their votes into seats." Given the Supreme Court's decision to take on the case, the judges' ruling could reverberate nationally.

"Both parties draw congressional and legislative districts to their own advantage," the Washington Post's Robert Barnes notes. "But Republicans have more to lose because they control so many more state legislatures."

Voter advocacy groups, which have long denounced GOP-drawn congressional districts as discriminatory and blatantly undemocratic, were quick to celebrate the Supreme Court's move.

"For too long, the important task of redistricting has resembled a back-alley brawl: no rules, no referees, and no holds barred," Dan Vicuña, the national redistricting manager for Common Cause, said in a statement. "Technology has made it easier than ever for self-interested legislators to manipulate districts for political advantage, so it is essential that courts step in to protect voters' fundamental constitutional rights."

Karen Hobert Flynn, president of Common Cause, added that gerrymandering "drive[s] too many Americans from our democratic process because citizens feel their votes don't count and sadly in states like Wisconsin and North Carolina today many of those citizens are absolutely right."

"Politicians should not be choosing their voters, voters should be choosing their politicians," she concluded.

Wendy Weiser, director of the Brennan Center for Justice's Democracy Program, also applauded the Supreme Court's announcement on Monday, calling it "a historic opportunity to address one of the biggest problems facing our electoral system."

"Gerrymandering has become so aggressive, extreme, and effective that there is an urgent need for the Supreme Court to finally step in and set boundaries," she said.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.

World Faces 'Loaded Gun' on Hiroshima's 77th Anniversary

“We must ask: What have we learned from the mushroom cloud that swelled above this city?”

Common Dreams staff ·


'Extremely Concerned': Shelling of Europe's Biggest Nuclear Power Plant More Worrying Than Chernobyl

Ukraine said parts of the facility were "seriously damaged" by Russian military strikes.

Common Dreams staff ·


'Backsliding on Democracy': Indiana Governor Signs Extreme Abortion Ban Bill

'The extremist lawmakers who forced this bill through a special session clearly could not care less about what their constituents want or need.'

Common Dreams staff ·


After Kansas Win, Abortion Rights Advocates Call Ballot Measures the 'Next Frontier'

"Ballot initiatives are a phenomenally powerful tool when there's a disconnect between the popularity of an issue and what's being enacted by politicians," said Kelly Hall of the Fairness Project.

Jessica Corbett ·


Sanders Crafts Amendment to Close 'Holes' in Medicare That 'Are Harming Seniors'

"Adding dental, vision, and hearing benefits to Medicare is supported by 84% of the American people," said an aide to the senator, who plans to propose including the expansion in Democrats' reconciliation package.

Brett Wilkins ·

Common Dreams Logo