At our September Thursday with the League meeting, our speaker, Alton Wang, Equal Justice Works Fellow with Common Cause, started our 2023–24 year with a fast-paced and most informative presentation concerning the Supreme Court decisions that affect redistricting and therefore affect our democracy. Click here to view the video.

The case of Moore v. Harper began in North Carolina. The North Carolina State Supreme Court ruled that the state’s congressional voting maps were illegal and discriminatory, requiring fair maps to be drawn. Then, the Republican lawmakers cited the controversial “independent state legislature theory” (ISLT) to support the idea that state legislators could exercise unchecked power to create gerrymandered voting maps and enact discriminatory rules. The case went to the U.S. Supreme Court, where the ISLT was rejected in June of this year. The League of Women Voters joined Common Cause and forty other amicus groups protesting the North Carolina ISLT and were happy to claim a victory for the “pro-voting” outcome of the Court’s decision.

The decision was important because the rejection of the ISLT reaffirmed the role of the state constitution and state courts as a check on state legislatures, confirming that state legislatures must comply with their state constitutions. The checks and balances that are at the heart of our democracy were upheld. The U.S. Supreme Court also reaffirmed the right of the people to oversee redistricting and to use the initiative power to create independent redistricting commissions.

Wang also explained the significance of Allen v. Milligan, a challenge to the Alabama state-drawn congressional voter map. Alabama’s population is over 25 percent Black, yet only one of seven voting districts (14 percent) were drawn to be majority Black. A court determined that Alabama’s voting districts were in violation of Section 2 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which prohibits voting practices or procedures that discriminate on the basis of race, color, or membership in a language minority group. The decision required a second majority-Black district to be drawn. The case went to the U.S. Supreme Court, where the lower court’s ruling was upheld. A new map was drawn by the state, but it is still out of compliance, since no second Black-majority district was created. The state of Alabama expects to appeal again, claiming time is too short to redraw the districts yet again with elections approaching. However, the trial court has stated that a second majority-Black district is required to meet the Gingles criteria (based on the unanimous 1986 Supreme Court decision in Thornburg v. Gingles,  which established standards for judging whether a voting district is fairly drawn).

That Gingles standard says that the minority group must be large and compact enough to constitute a majority population in a reasonable configured district, and the group must be politically cohesive. Also, the majority must be seen to consistently vote as a bloc to defeat minority-supported candidates.

Wang noted three other states where federal litigation is ongoing:

• In Florida, Common Cause Florida v. Byrd is challenging the congressional map that has been drawn as in violation of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. As of this writing, this case is slated to go to trial at the end of September.
• In Georgia, Common Cause v. Raffensperger is challenging the congressional map as a racial gerrymander in violation of the U.S. Constitution.
• In Texas, Fair Maps Texas Action Committee v. Abbott is challenging the state legislative and congressional maps as racial gerrymanders, again in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Locally, we have seen the state of California create an Independent Redistricting Commission that set the voting districts for statewide elections. The City of Los Angeles is now being urged to follow that lead and create a commission that will ensure the fairness, integrity, and transparency of the districts drawn for City Council, reflecting the diversity and growth of the city. Community input would be essential to the map-drawing process.

What to advocate for voting rights at the national level? The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act (restoring section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which the Court struck down in 2013) has still not passed, but efforts to push it forward, including a campaign by the national League of Women Voters, have recently been revived. Contact your representatives and remind them that everyone deserves the right to vote!

—Jean Buennagel, Events Committee