Ohio, Michigan Ask Supreme Court to Block Redistricting Orders

May 13, 2019 by Dan McCue

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.

 

Supreme Court

Center for American Progress Mulls Proposal for Supreme Court Term Limits
Supreme Court
Center for American Progress Mulls Proposal for Supreme Court Term Limits
August 10, 2020
by Kate Michael

WASHINGTON - While the Constitution does not expressly grant lifetime appointment for Supreme Court justices, it has, since the nation’s founding, been inferred from Article III, Section I, that “The Judges… shall hold their Offices during good Behavior” has meant career tenure. Today, due to advances... Read More

Supreme Court Won't Halt Challenged Border Wall Projects
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Won't Halt Challenged Border Wall Projects

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court declined by a 5-4 vote Friday to halt the Trump administration's construction of portions of the border wall with Mexico following a recent lower court ruling that the administration improperly diverted money to the project. The court's four liberal justices dissented, saying... Read More

With DACA Ruling, Did Supreme Court Grant Trump New Powers to Reshape Health Care?
Immigration
With DACA Ruling, Did Supreme Court Grant Trump New Powers to Reshape Health Care?

President Donald Trump came into office vowing to repeal and replace Obamacare. While he successfully neutralized the health care law’s requirement that everyone carry insurance, the law remains in effect. When Fox News host Chris Wallace noted that Trump has yet to put forward a replacement... Read More

John Roberts’ Latest Deciding Vote Spurs Wrath of Conservatives
Supreme Court
John Roberts’ Latest Deciding Vote Spurs Wrath of Conservatives

The latest Supreme Court vote cast by Chief Justice John Roberts, rejecting an effort by a Nevada church to ease limits on attendance at its services during the coronavirus pandemic, was condemned by conservative lawmakers. Roberts was the decider late Friday, joining the court’s liberals in... Read More

With DACA Ruling, Did Supreme Court Grant Trump New Powers to Reshape Health Care?
Political News
With DACA Ruling, Did Supreme Court Grant Trump New Powers to Reshape Health Care?

President Donald Trump came into office vowing to repeal and replace Obamacare. While he successfully neutralized the health care law’s requirement that everyone carry insurance, the law remains in effect. When Fox News host Chris Wallace noted that Trump has yet to put forward a replacement... Read More

Justice Ginsburg Says Cancer Has Returned, But She Won't Retire
Supreme Court
Justice Ginsburg Says Cancer Has Returned, But She Won't Retire
July 17, 2020
by Dan McCue

WASHINGTON - Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said Friday she is receiving chemotherapy for a recurrence of cancer, but has no plans to retire from the Supreme Court. The 87-year-old Ginsburg, who spent time in the hospital this week for a possible infection, said she began chemotherapy... Read More

News From The Well
scroll top