Ohio, Michigan Ask Supreme Court to Block Redistricting Orders
The attorneys for both Ohio and Michigan asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday to intervene and block lower court orders to rectify partisan gerrymanders.
In Ohio, a three-judge panel ruled that the state’s congressional district map was unconstitutionally gerrymandered to perpetuate Republican power and disadvantage Democrats.
The judges ordered the Ohio General Assembly to draw a new map by June 14.
But in an emergency petition filed with Supreme Court Friday afternoon, Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost, a Republican, asked the justices to set aside the ruling of the judges — who refused on Thursday to stay their own order — pending the resolution of the state’s appeal before the High Court.
“The District Court reached this conclusion by adopting novel legal theories it copied from lower-court cases that this court is now reviewing. That is bad enough on its own, but the relief the court ordered makes its holding even worse,” Yost wrote.
Yost added: “Drafting a map that is ultimately unlikely to be used is exceptionally unfair and confusing for voters and candidates,” said the filing from the first-year attorney general.
The first-term attorney general also argued that the June 14 deadline was arbitrary because a map only need be produced by Sept. 19 of this year to be used in the 2020 elections.
In a separate emergency petition, Michigan Republicans also asked the justices to halt a court-ordered redrawing of the state’s congressional and legislative districts pending their appeal.
In the filing, attorney Gary Gordon, of Dykema Gossett in Lansing, Michigan, argued
Michigan’s political system would be thrown into “unnecessary chaos” if the legislature is forced to comply with an August 1 deadline to redraw dozens of congressional and legislative districts for the 2020 election.
As in Ohio, the current maps have been held to unlawfully favor Republicans over Democrats.
Like Yost’s petition in the Ohio case, Gordon said it would be particularly wasteful to proceed with drawing a new map when no one knows what the Supreme Court will decide in two pending partisan gerrymandering cases.
The High Court is expected to rule by June 30 on gerrymandering cases out of North Carolina and Maryland in which a central question is whether courts should review partisan-gerrymandering claims at all, or instead leave the issue to politicians and the political process.
The emergency petitions were filed with Justice Sonia Sotomayor who handles emergency appeals from the Sixth Circuit, a region that includes Ohio and Michigan.
In The News
Notice: Undefined variable: primary_cat in /var/www/html/thewellnews/wp-content/themes/twentynineteen-child/includes/CategoryPostsWidget.php on line 93
The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that a Pennsylvania school district violated the First Amendment by punishing a student over a vulgar social-media rant sent away from school grounds. The vote was 8 to 1, with Justice Clarence Thomas dissenting. The underlying case was filed on... Read More
In a unanimous decision Monday, the justices held the NCAA can’t enforce rules limiting education-related benefits — like computers and paid internships — that colleges offer to student athletes. The case doesn’t decide whether students can be paid salaries. Instead, the ruling will help determine whether... Read More
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that Congress erred when it set up a board to oversee patent disputes by failing to make the judges properly accountable to the president. As a result, it said, more than 200 administrative judges who preside over patent... Read More
The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed a challenge to the Affordable Care Act, preserving insurance coverage for millions of Americans. By a 7-2 vote, the justices left the entire law intact and ruled that Texas and other Republican-led states (as well as two individual plaintiffs) have... Read More
WASHINGTON (AP) — With abortion and guns already on the agenda, the conservative-dominated Supreme Court is considering adding a third blockbuster issue — whether to ban consideration of race in college admissions. The justices on Monday put off a decision about whether they will hear an... Read More
The Supreme Court this week decided to leave in place a $2 billion verdict in favor of women who claim they developed ovarian cancer from using Johnson & Johnson talc products. As is their custom, the justices did not comment Tuesday on why they rejected Johnson & Johnson's... Read More