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
Health
Voting
Supreme Court
WASHINGTON (AP) — As coronavirus cases surge again nationwide the Supreme Court late Wednesday barred New York from enforcing certain limits on attendance at churches and synagogues in areas designated as hard hit by the virus. The justices split 5-4 with new Justice Amy Coney Barrett in the... Read More
WASHINGTON - Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., told the Federalist Society in a keynote address Thursday night the coronavirus pandemic has led to "previously unimaginable restrictions on individual liberty." "I am not diminishing the severity of the virus's threat to public health," Alito continued in a... Read More
WASHINGTON -- So much for the new conservative majority of the Supreme Court dismantling the Affordable Care Act. On Tuesday, during oral arguments for California v. Texas, one of this term's most anticipated cases, two members of that majority, suggested they're not inclined to strike down... Read More
WASHINGTON — This morning, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on a legal challenge seeking to overturn the Affordable Care Act. This third major challenge to the ACA heard by the Supreme Court, Texas v. California seeks to decide whether Congress, by eliminating the penalty... Read More
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court with new Justice Amy Coney Barrett hears oral argument Tuesday in a case that threatens to wipe out the 2010 health care law, likely the term's most consequential case, under a political spotlight that rarely shines brighter on justices who would rather stay out of it.... Read More
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday set aside an appeals court ruling by a panel of conservative judges that held an injured police officer could sue and win damages from the leader of a Black Lives Matter protest rally. The case had raised alarms among civil libertarians, who said it... Read More
