On Nov. 7, federal district courts in Maryland ruled that the state must replace its current congressional district map before the 2020 elections due to partisan gerrymandering. This decision will have significant impact on Maryland politics, and may have greater implications for the country as a whole.
Immediately following 2010 census, Democratic state legislatures were responsible for redrawing the district lines for Maryland’s congressional delegation. Prior to the redistricting in 2011, Maryland typically had Republican representation in both Districts 1 and 6.
However, since the new districting was implemented, District 6 has shifted from a solidly Republican seat to an overwhelmingly Democratic one. This shift is not due to changing demographics within the district, but to the inclusion of more liberal areas of Montgomery and Frederick county in a district that geographically includes all of western Maryland, stretching up past Cumberland to the borders of Pennsylvania and West Virginia.
Republicans in Maryland brought this case to the federal courts earlier this year, requesting temporary district maps to be drawn before the 2018 midterms, in a case titled Benisek v. Lamone. The Supreme Court denied their request on June 18, affirming the ruling of a lower court. The Nov. 7 ruling, however, was the first ruling on the plaintiff’s main case on partisan gerrymandering, and the first aspect of the case to be ruled in favor of the plaintiff.
Maryland’s recently re-elected Attorney General Brian Frosh announced on Nov. 15 his plans to appeal the case to the Supreme Court, as reported by the Baltimore Sun. According to his filing, Frosh hopes for clear guidance from the higher courts on what standards Maryland leaders should apply when drawing their next district map.
The Supreme Court has already heard cases on political gerrymandering this year. In addition to the temporary relief request of Benisek v. Lamone, they have heard a case alleging partisan gerrymandering in favor of Republicans in Wisconsin. However, the Democratic plaintiffs in the Wisconsin case were unable to prove to the court adequate injury.
In the past, the Supreme Court has ruled that gerrymandering is unconstitutional when based on racial demographics of a state. However, court precedent is unclear in cases of partisan gerrymandering.
A Supreme Court ruling on Maryland’s districts may potentially cause district maps with partisan gerrymandering to be thrown out countrywide over time. Although Maryland’s district map favors the Democrats, a national court precedent on partisan gerrymandering would likely have a greater effect on the Republican party, as they stand to lose more seats in the House of Representatives and in many state legislatures if districts are redrawn.
Article by MoCo Student staff writer Elliot Davey of Wheaton High School.