Type:
Press MentionDate of Release or Mention:
Wednesday, September 17, 2025By Jessica Holdman
COLUMBIA — The state Supreme Court upheld South Carolina’s congressional voting lines Wednesday by ruling there’s nothing unconstitutional about partisan gerrymandering. The decision marks the second time in less than two years that a high court has validated the map redrawn by the Legislature following the 2020 census.
“After years of litigation — only for the federal and state supreme courts to tell us what we knew all along — I am grateful to see this matter finally resolved,” Senate President Thomas Alexander, R-Walhalla, said in a statement.
After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in May 2024 that the lines did not racially discriminate, the League of Women Voters sued in state court, using Republicans’ arguments that it was party, not race, that influenced the redrawing. Its lawsuit argued legislators violated the state constitution with a map that intentionally gave Republicans the advantage in the coastal 1st District, making it easier for the GOP to keep the seat after it flipped for a single term.
A federal court “clearly erred” in determining that South Carolina legislators racially gerrymandered congressional voting lines to keep the coastal 1st District red, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday in sending the case back to the three-judge panel for further analysis on a separate question. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, repeatedly used the …
Justices disagreed unanimously.
The state constitution protects an individual’s right to vote. But “there are no constitutional provisions or statutes that pertain to, prohibit, or limit partisan gerrymandering in the congressional redistricting process in South Carolina,” wrote Justice George James in the majority opinion signed on to by justices John Few and Letitia Verdin.
Therefore, a partisan gerrymandering claim is a “political question” outside the court’s authority, he concluded.
Chief Justice John Kittredge offered a more limited view. While he agreed a court can’t resolve this particular claim, it’s possible “a future challenge may present more fully developed constitutional violations,” he wrote in a separate opinion signed on to by Justice Garrison Hill.
In response, the League of Women Voters said the ruling presents a contradiction: It indicates only the Legislature can address partisan gerrymandering, and that’s the same body responsible for the problem.“Partisan gerrymandering is an attack on our most fundamental right as citizens, the right to vote,” Lynn Teague, the league’s vice president said in a statement, adding that the group “will not stop fighting for fair redistricting.”She encouraged South Carolinians to demand a constitutional amendment to protect their vote. But that too would require the Legislature’s blessing. State law doesn’t allow a voter-led referendum. In South Carolina, it takes supermajority approval by both chambers just to put a question on the ballot asking voters if they approve changing the constitution.
The ruling comes as other states nationwide redraw their congressional lines mid-way through the normally decennial process to create more safe seats ahead of the 2026 elections, which will determine whether Republicans keep control of the U.S. House.
...
Read the full article at the link above.
League to which this content belongs:
South Carolina
