Mid-decade redistricting

[MillennialModerate]

Maryland: Spectator pointed out that Maryland could redraw MD-01 and maintain double digit Biden seats (+2 DEM)

Minnesota: Democrats took control of the Minnesota State Senate - now with a trifecta. The seats are currently 4-4. From the looks of it the breakdown is 4 GOP, 3 DEM, 1 tossup. It could be gerrymandered into a 6-2 Democratic map (minus 2 from GOP and add 2 to Dems. (+4 DEM)

Ohio: Already a gerrymander. It’s a 55/45 state but GOP has 65% of the seats. This election resulted in a 10-5 GOP advantage. I could see it changed a little to make it 12-3 GOP (+4 GOP)

North Carolina: Currently 7 GOP, 6 DEM, 1 Tossup. It’s surely going to be rigged to a 9-4-1 map (+4 GOP)

Wild Card:


New York: Currently is 15-11 for this election but the map is really a 16 Dem, 6 GOP, 4 Tossup. It could be rigged into a 22-4 map. At minimum that’s a 4 seat gain for Dems. (+4 DEM)

Question


What other states are out there and are there any rules against redistricting mid-decade? And why couldn’t Dems put forth a ballot measure saying - a commission could be overruled to offset gerrymandering nationally. I think it would pass because the state is SOOO heavily Dem. If that happened that would change the game in a big way. Probably a 16 seat swing

[Spectator]

You have the numbers mixed up for NY on the highlight.

You forgot MD-01 could be removed and Democrats all drawn into double digit blue seats still.

[Death of a Salesman]

There are restrictions on several of these, which generally tilt against Democrats.

In Minnesota, the relevant law is Article IV, Section 3 of the State Constitution, which states that "At its first session after each enumeration of the inhabitants of this state made by the authority of the United States, the legislature shall have the power to prescribe the bounds of congressional and legislative districts. Senators shall be chosen by single districts of convenient contiguous territory. No representative district shall be divided in the formation of a senate district. The senate districts shall be numbered in a regular series."

Democrats have a majority on the Minnesota Supreme Court, but the constitutional language is quite clear. The upcoming session will be the second session after the Census, and so the legislature does not possess the power to redistrict.

In Maryland, the State Supreme Court is dominated by Hogan appointees, and so any plan for a Democratic redraw would have to run through them, so this also appears unlikely.

In the case of Ohio, the current map passed is valid for the 2022 and 2024 elections, unless the Ohio Supreme Court invalidates it sooner, so it's fairly unlikely that it will be modified before the next cycle.

In New York, it takes a 2/3rds majority to overrule the Independent Redistricting Commission, which Democrats had in the past legislative session. Democrats now hold 41/63 State Senate seats, and 101/150 State Assembly seats, which means that they no longer possess the power to overrule the Commission along party lines. This would seem to be a sticking point in any plans for a unilateral gerrymander.

In North Carolina, the court map is for one cycle only, and Republicans now control the legislature and the court, which means a unilateral redraw is possible. The Republican proposal the legislature passed in 2021 would create 10 Republican seats, 3 Democratic seats, and 1 narrowly Democratic but Republican-trending seat in Eastern NC.

So the GOP will probably net 3 seats in 2024 from North Carolina, with other states staying the same.

[Mr.Phips]

There are restrictions on several of these, which generally tilt against Democrats.

In Minnesota, the relevant law is Article IV, Section 3 of the State Constitution, which states that "At its first session after each enumeration of the inhabitants of this state made by the authority of the United States, the legislature shall have the power to prescribe the bounds of congressional and legislative districts. Senators shall be chosen by single districts of convenient contiguous territory. No representative district shall be divided in the formation of a senate district. The senate districts shall be numbered in a regular series."

Democrats have a majority on the Minnesota Supreme Court, but the constitutional language is quite clear. The upcoming session will be the second session after the Census, and so the legislature does not possess the power to redistrict.

In Maryland, the State Supreme Court is dominated by Hogan appointees, and so any plan for a Democratic redraw would have to run through them, so this also appears unlikely.

In the case of Ohio, the current map passed is valid for the 2022 and 2024 elections, unless the Ohio Supreme Court invalidates it sooner, so it's fairly unlikely that it will be modified before the next cycle.

In New York, it takes a 2/3rds majority to overrule the Independent Redistricting Commission, which Democrats had in the past legislative session. Democrats now hold 41/63 State Senate seats, and 101/150 State Assembly seats, which means that they no longer possess the power to overrule the Commission along party lines. This would seem to be a sticking point in any plans for a unilateral gerrymander.

In North Carolina, the court map is for one cycle only, and Republicans now control the legislature and the court, which means a unilateral redraw is possible. The Republican proposal the legislature passed in 2021 would create 10 Republican seats, 3 Democratic seats, and 1 narrowly Democratic but Republican-trending seat in Eastern NC.

So the GOP will probably net 3 seats in 2024 from North Carolina, with other states staying the same.

In New York, the would be 42nd seat for Dems is a North Syracuse seat where they currently trail by about 300 votes with about about 3,000 absentees yet to be counted.  If they win that seat, they will have a supermajority. 

[Hope For A New Era]

You've also missed Wisconsin - if Dems can win a state supreme court seat in a few months, they could court-redraw it to 4-4.

[Death of a Salesman]

You've also missed Wisconsin - if Dems can win a state supreme court seat in a few months, they could court-redraw it to 4-4.

The current Wisconsin map was drawn by Tony Evers and picked by a 4-3 majority which was composed of the 3 Democratic justices and GOP justice Brian Hagedorn. This was after an early decision, made along partisan lines, where the court committed to maintaining the core of the 2010s districts. For your scenario to happen, Democrats would have to win the election, repudiate the earlier decision on redistricting, strike down the current court drawn map, and draw an absurd partisan gerrymander. This does not strike me as particularly likely.

[Death of a Salesman]

In New York, the would be 42nd seat for Dems is a North Syracuse seat where they currently trail by about 300 votes with about about 3,000 absentees yet to be counted.  If they win that seat, they will have a supermajority. 

Yes, that race has not been called, but it would leave the Democrats with virtually no margin for error, and a Democratic victory is not certain.
The current GOP lead in SD-50 is 396 votes, from the county websites.
Remaining votes break down as follows
Onondaga County Absentee: 915 (expected breakdown 622 D-293 R)
Onondaga County Affidavit: 1067 (expected to break slightly D)
Oswego County Absentee: 282 (expected breakdown 143 D - 139 R)
Oswego County Affidavit: 287 (expected to break slightly R)
If we assume Affidavit ballots are 5% more D than votes as a whole, then then the Democrat net 194 votes from Onondaga and -49 from Oswego, for a 82 vote victory. But it does not seem clear to me that the normal Democratic lean of Affidavit ballots will hold in an election where the GOP voters are more likely to vote in person on election.

[Mr.Phips]

You've also missed Wisconsin - if Dems can win a state supreme court seat in a few months, they could court-redraw it to 4-4.

The current Wisconsin map was drawn by Tony Evers and picked by a 4-3 majority which was composed of the 3 Democratic justices and GOP justice Brian Hagedorn. This was after an early decision, made along partisan lines, where the court committed to maintaining the core of the 2010s districts. For your scenario to happen, Democrats would have to win the election, repudiate the earlier decision on redistricting, strike down the current court drawn map, and draw an absurd partisan gerrymander. This does not strike me as particularly likely.

Yeah the Wisconsin US House map is pretty evenhanded, it’s just that geography is terrible for Dems in that state. It’s the legislature map that Dems would have a decent shot at overturning.  It would probably give them an extra senate seat in the Milwaukee area along with a couple of assembly seats there.  It wouldn’t get them close to a majority, but they wouldn’t be a super minority.

[Skill and Chance]

This is assuming the rules stay the same.  Even the mildest form of an ISL ruling (only clear state constitutional language can restrict the legislature) from SCOTUS would allow MD to redraw in addition to NC (PA would also theoretically be allowed to redraw, but they governor and potentially a Dem state house would block it).  The next level of ISL (state courts can't strike down maps passed through the normal legislative process) would also allow MN and NY to redraw immediately.  The next level of ISL after that (throwing out redistricting commissions nationwide) would actually be a bonanza for Democrats in this environment.  They would get to gerrymander CA, NY, NJ, WA, MI, and CO, losing ground only in OH, MT (just one seat), and maybe AZ (Hobbs might be able to veto).  The most extreme form of ISL (no state court review or commissions, plus the governor can't veto) would mean WI and possibly NH get R gerrymanders, and then VA is at stake in the 2023 legislative elections. 

[Tekken_Guy]

This is assuming the rules stay the same.  Even the mildest form of an ISL ruling (only clear state constitutional language can restrict the legislature) from SCOTUS would allow MD to redraw in addition to NC (PA would also theoretically be allowed to redraw, but they governor and potentially a Dem state house would block it).  The next level of ISL (state courts can't strike down maps passed through the normal legislative process) would also allow MN and NY to redraw immediately.  The next level of ISL after that (throwing out redistricting commissions nationwide) would actually be a bonanza for Democrats in this environment.  They would get to gerrymander CA, NY, NJ, WA, MI, and CO, losing ground only in OH, MT (just one seat), and maybe AZ (Hobbs might be able to veto).  The most extreme form of ISL (no state court review or commissions, plus the governor can't veto) would mean WI and possibly NH get R gerrymanders, and then VA is at stake in the 2023 legislative elections. 

The effects by state

AZ: Republicans priority will be to shore up Schweikert and Ciscomani.
CA: If that's the case, LaMalfa and McCarthy may be the only Republicans left. Maybe McClintock, Obernolte, and Issa make it.
CO: Caraveo is shored up and Boebert's screwed.
MD: Andy Harris is in trouble.
MI: Slotkin may get shored up with Washtenaw and Scholten with Kalamazoo. Not sure what they can do with Kildee or James.
MT: Not much happening other than shoring up Zinke.
NH: They turn Pappas's seat into a gerrymander.
NJ: A gerrymander means that Kean is cooked and Van Drew's in deep trouble.
NY: The Hochulmander returns.
WA: Basically shoring up Perez and Schrier.
WI: Republicans' priority would be to shore up Steil and Van Orden. The former gets his portion of Waukesha back and the latter may drop Portage and Eau Claire for rurals.

[windjammer]

Sorry for bumping this but:

NY democrats have a supermajority in both the state house and state senate right?

Now that Hochul is going to replace a conservative judge to the one of her liking. Is there anything that could stop NY democrats to redraw the maps?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Sorry for bumping this but:

NY democrats have a supermajority in both the state house and state senate right?

Now that Hochul is going to replace a conservative judge to the one of her liking. Is there anything that could stop NY democrats to redraw the maps?

Nothing I can think of, provided the situation is as you describe it.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Sorry for bumping this but:

NY democrats have a supermajority in both the state house and state senate right?

Now that Hochul is going to replace a conservative judge to the one of her liking. Is there anything that could stop NY democrats to redraw the maps?

Nothing I can think of, provided the situation is as you describe it.

NY Dems biggest problem is if there's the political will to redraw. Rmbr, part of their state Senate Majority is Simcha Felder who represents a 70% Trump seat. Felder has already changed parties a bunch before, tends to be unreliable but is prone to political deal-making to try and get what the Orthodox community wants.

Their state assembly majority is also super narrow, though I don't know specifically who a liability would be.

[Mr.Phips]

Sorry for bumping this but:

NY democrats have a supermajority in both the state house and state senate right?

Now that Hochul is going to replace a conservative judge to the one of her liking. Is there anything that could stop NY democrats to redraw the maps?

Nothing I can think of, provided the situation is as you describe it.

NY Dems biggest problem is if there's the political will to redraw. Rmbr, part of their state Senate Majority is Simcha Felder who represents a 70% Trump seat. Felder has already changed parties a bunch before, tends to be unreliable but is prone to political deal-making to try and get what the Orthodox community wants.

Their state assembly majority is also super narrow, though I don't know specifically who a liability would be.

Felder can probably be bought off.   Dems seem likely to have a two seat supermajority in the assembly.  They can afford to lose two there.

[EastAnglianLefty]

This is assuming the rules stay the same.  Even the mildest form of an ISL ruling (only clear state constitutional language can restrict the legislature) from SCOTUS would allow MD to redraw in addition to NC (PA would also theoretically be allowed to redraw, but they governor and potentially a Dem state house would block it).  The next level of ISL (state courts can't strike down maps passed through the normal legislative process) would also allow MN and NY to redraw immediately.  The next level of ISL after that (throwing out redistricting commissions nationwide) would actually be a bonanza for Democrats in this environment.  They would get to gerrymander CA, NY, NJ, WA, MI, and CO, losing ground only in OH, MT (just one seat), and maybe AZ (Hobbs might be able to veto).  The most extreme form of ISL (no state court review or commissions, plus the governor can't veto) would mean WI and possibly NH get R gerrymanders, and then VA is at stake in the 2023 legislative elections. 

The effects by state

AZ: Republicans priority will be to shore up Schweikert and Ciscomani.
CA: If that's the case, LaMalfa and McCarthy may be the only Republicans left. Maybe McClintock, Obernolte, and Issa make it.
CO: Caraveo is shored up and Boebert's screwed.
MD: Andy Harris is in trouble.
MI: Slotkin may get shored up with Washtenaw and Scholten with Kalamazoo. Not sure what they can do with Kildee or James.
MT: Not much happening other than shoring up Zinke.
NH: They turn Pappas's seat into a gerrymander.
NJ: A gerrymander means that Kean is cooked and Van Drew's in deep trouble.
NY: The Hochulmander returns.
WA: Basically shoring up Perez and Schrier.
WI: Republicans' priority would be to shore up Steil and Van Orden. The former gets his portion of Waukesha back and the latter may drop Portage and Eau Claire for rurals.

James would be easy to deal with - if you swap Rochester for SE Oakland then both MI-10 and MI-11 would be Biden +10 seats.

[politicallefty]

CA: If that's the case, LaMalfa and McCarthy may be the only Republicans left. Maybe McClintock, Obernolte, and Issa make it.

Depending on how the chips really fall in that case, it would be in Democrats' interest to point the figurative gun at McCarthy and threaten to annihilate his district unless an anti-gerrymandering bill is signed into law. I know he has the easiest vote sink in California, but snakes can work their magic. We either get fair maps across the country or McCarthy gets no district.

[Spectator]

This is assuming the rules stay the same.  Even the mildest form of an ISL ruling (only clear state constitutional language can restrict the legislature) from SCOTUS would allow MD to redraw in addition to NC (PA would also theoretically be allowed to redraw, but they governor and potentially a Dem state house would block it).  The next level of ISL (state courts can't strike down maps passed through the normal legislative process) would also allow MN and NY to redraw immediately.  The next level of ISL after that (throwing out redistricting commissions nationwide) would actually be a bonanza for Democrats in this environment.  They would get to gerrymander CA, NY, NJ, WA, MI, and CO, losing ground only in OH, MT (just one seat), and maybe AZ (Hobbs might be able to veto).  The most extreme form of ISL (no state court review or commissions, plus the governor can't veto) would mean WI and possibly NH get R gerrymanders, and then VA is at stake in the 2023 legislative elections. 

The effects by state

AZ: Republicans priority will be to shore up Schweikert and Ciscomani.
CA: If that's the case, LaMalfa and McCarthy may be the only Republicans left. Maybe McClintock, Obernolte, and Issa make it.
CO: Caraveo is shored up and Boebert's screwed.
MD: Andy Harris is in trouble.
MI: Slotkin may get shored up with Washtenaw and Scholten with Kalamazoo. Not sure what they can do with Kildee or James.
MT: Not much happening other than shoring up Zinke.
NH: They turn Pappas's seat into a gerrymander.
NJ: A gerrymander means that Kean is cooked and Van Drew's in deep trouble.
NY: The Hochulmander returns.
WA: Basically shoring up Perez and Schrier.
WI: Republicans' priority would be to shore up Steil and Van Orden. The former gets his portion of Waukesha back and the latter may drop Portage and Eau Claire for rurals.

Pretty clear that independent commissions are acting to Democrats' detriment. They'd probably have a clear majority right now.

[muon2]

OH will be interesting to watch. Though the map passed in 2022 would seem to last through 2024, the OH Supreme Court found it to be unconstitutional and required the legislature to produce a new one. Failing that the Ohio Redistricting Commission was to produce a map. However, all of that was held off due to the time constraints of the impeding primary.

Presumably the court order for a new map was going to be on the order of business this session. But the OH House is now in control of a bipartisan coalition of moderate Pubs and the Dems. That will change the dynamics of how the legislature/commission address the current unconstitutional map.

[ProgressiveModerate]

If VRA is partially or fully gutted, what states could that impact?

I'm thinking TX-29, MS-02, AL-07, and GA-02 would all be at biggest risk of being cut.

I don't think the willpower is there to crack seats like MO-01, LA-02, and TN-09 (and that would require a complete gut of the VRA which is not the most likely outcome imo).

Even without the VRA, there's really no way to do a secure 7R-0D map in South Carolina just because of the State's topline partisanship not even being that red.

Depending upon how SCOTUS words it's opinion, TX may be forced to redraw it's congressional map, but they'll still be able to do an extreme gerrrymander.

What I worry about if VRA is completely overturned is that they'll be a spur of states redrawing and all inspiring eachother to make the most extreme gerrymanders possible. This also risks normalizing mid-decade redistricting which isn't a good thing.





Also I think NY Dems will eventually redraw NY successfully, the question is when. The court is going to flip to the liberal majority (but if Hochul is stubborn it may take a while), and chances are their supermajorities will be larger in a more "normal" year.




Other possibilities for mid-decade redraws include OH, OK, FL, MO, AR, and OR if commissions are passed via ballot inaitiative, but in all of these states the majority party will fight tooth and nail to stop it. Ohio seems to have a fairly strong effort going for 2024, I think the barrier will be if Rs in control of the state at every level find a way to stop it.




The general theme seems to be that most mid-decade redrawing opportunities by the legislature seem to favor Rs (with the looming NY wild card), whereas most of the outstanding commission possibilities favor Demorats.

[Progressive Pessimist]

OH will be interesting to watch. Though the map passed in 2022 would seem to last through 2024, the OH Supreme Court found it to be unconstitutional and required the legislature to produce a new one. Failing that the Ohio Redistricting Commission was to produce a map. However, all of that was held off due to the time constraints of the impeding primary.

Presumably the court order for a new map was going to be on the order of business this session. But the OH House is now in control of a bipartisan coalition of moderate Pubs and the Dems. That will change the dynamics of how the legislature/commission address the current unconstitutional map.

Ironically, given how the 2022 midterms turned out Democrats would probably be well-off by keeping the same map in place, maybe redrawing OH-1 to be more compact. But other than that it might already be the best Democrats can realistically hope for.