Skip to navigationSkip to content

Supreme Court Says Voting Maps Can't Be Challenged as Too Partisan

By Bloomberg

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled it has no constitutional authority to throw out voting maps for being too partisan, effectively giving parties that control state legislatures license to redraw districts to cement their political advantagesRead full story

Comments

  • Also share to
  • Bradley Tusk
    Bradley TuskproCEO at Tusk Ventures

    Because of gerrymandering, most US elections are decided in primaries. Primary turnout is abysmally low – even in a year as political as 2018, it remained under 20%. That means the furthest right or left wing voters control the agenda and dictate policy, because they bother to show up and no one else does. It's why Alabama bans abortion. It’s why New York City chases out Amazon’s 25,000 jobs. The only way to change the policy outputs is to change the political inputs and the only way to do that is

    Because of gerrymandering, most US elections are decided in primaries. Primary turnout is abysmally low – even in a year as political as 2018, it remained under 20%. That means the furthest right or left wing voters control the agenda and dictate policy, because they bother to show up and no one else does. It's why Alabama bans abortion. It’s why New York City chases out Amazon’s 25,000 jobs. The only way to change the policy outputs is to change the political inputs and the only way to do that is to make voting radically easier. That will never happen if we stick with an election system designed 250 years ago for an agrarian society. Over 80% of adults have a smartphone. Blockchain voting has been proven to work in recent elections in Denver and West Virginia. We need to radically increase turnout if we want to countereffect the devastation caused by gerrymandering and the only way to do that is through mobile voting.

  • Dilip John
    Dilip JohnOwner at Apple's Heart Corporation

    Gerrymandering is antithetical to democracy! Why would the Supreme Court think that isn't an issue related to one person, one vote?

    This leaves it to the citizens to lobby at state level and push for a national standard or amendment

  • Weiyee IN
    Weiyee INChief Strategy Officer

    Although the article does point out that the voting maps "right now" favor Republicans, historically that is not necessarily the case, and historically from Governor Gerry the precedence has been orchestrating in favor of

    Gerry's Democratic-Republican Party in Massachusetts. Gerry's history has been evidence of packing against Federalists and then his legacy against Republicans under Lincoln over the issue of slavery. To trace the lineage of the voting maps does not actually clarify the issues today

    Although the article does point out that the voting maps "right now" favor Republicans, historically that is not necessarily the case, and historically from Governor Gerry the precedence has been orchestrating in favor of

    Gerry's Democratic-Republican Party in Massachusetts. Gerry's history has been evidence of packing against Federalists and then his legacy against Republicans under Lincoln over the issue of slavery. To trace the lineage of the voting maps does not actually clarify the issues today, because current Republicans are not the same Republican says under Lincoln, nor are the Democrats the same under Jackson. The evolution of the parties and the platforms suggest that there is no historical precedent for either party and only can be argued as a snapshot in time.

  • Patrick deHahn
    Patrick deHahnNews curator at Quartz

    This is huge--a top court decision on a contentious topic in US democracy.

    Also something to watch next year: "The ruling will shape the next round of map-drawing, which will take place around the country after the 2020 census."

  • Awful. It’s true that there’s always some, inherent partisanship involved in drawing up congressional maps— but the idea that partisan gerrymanders are NEVER unconstitutional is insane.

    This is a historic decision by the Supreme Court, but not in a good way. This case was an opportunity to restore some dignity and integrity to our elections, to take a concrete step toward restoring a government by, of, and for the people. The Court has thrown it away.

  • Christopher Ready
    Christopher ReadySenior Director, Programmatic Media

    In 2018 in Wisconsin, Republicans won 44% of votes and 64% of seats in the statehouse. In NC, Republicans won 50% of the vote and 10 of 13 congressional districts.

    The only silver lining of this disastrous decision is that it forces us to concede that “one person, one vote” is a myth in the US.

Want more conversations like this?

Join the Quartz community for all the intelligence, without the noise.

App Store BadgeGoogle Play Badge
Leaderboard Screenshot

A community of leaders, subject matter experts, and curious minds bringing nuance back to how we talk about the news.

Editors' Picks Screenshot

No content overload: our editors will curate the most notable and discussion-worthy pieces for you every day.

Share Screenshot

Don’t just read the story, tell it: contribute your ideas and experience to the dialogue.