North Carolina 2020 Redistricting

[David Hume]

This is pointless. The SCONC will flip anyway and republicans will draw another gerrymander mid decade

There’s no downside for us; why not fight it in court and see what we can get?

This.  It's also unconstitutional in NC to redraw the state legislative districts mid-decade, so if either of those maps get thrown out, the changes will stick.  Dems could plausibly flip a chamber over the course of the decade.

Did they explicitly forbid it? If not, this will be up to the likely GOP SC in 2022.

It says the process is done at the first legislative session after the census is released. 

Have you checked TX, GA, NV constitutions? I believe such language should be there as well. I am curious which state does not have this type of language.

[Mr.Phips]

This is pointless. The SCONC will flip anyway and republicans will draw another gerrymander mid decade

There’s no downside for us; why not fight it in court and see what we can get?

This.  It's also unconstitutional in NC to redraw the state legislative districts mid-decade, so if either of those maps get thrown out, the changes will stick.  Dems could plausibly flip a chamber over the course of the decade.

Did they explicitly forbid it? If not, this will be up to the likely GOP SC in 2022.

It says the process is done at the first legislative session after the census is released. 

Have you checked TX, GA, NV constitutions? I believe such language should be there as well. I am curious which state does not have this type of language.

TX and NV have this language for the legislative districts.  Georgia’s language is a bit more open.

[Skill and Chance]

This is pointless. The SCONC will flip anyway and republicans will draw another gerrymander mid decade

There’s no downside for us; why not fight it in court and see what we can get?

This.  It's also unconstitutional in NC to redraw the state legislative districts mid-decade, so if either of those maps get thrown out, the changes will stick.  Dems could plausibly flip a chamber over the course of the decade.

Did they explicitly forbid it? If not, this will be up to the likely GOP SC in 2022.

It says the process is done at the first legislative session after the census is released. 

Have you checked TX, GA, NV constitutions? I believe such language should be there as well. I am curious which state does not have this type of language.

TX and NV have this language for the legislative districts.  Georgia’s language is a bit more open.

Mid-decade legislative redistricting is clearly allowed in GA, as they made some minor changes through the normal legislative process in the late 2010's without a court ordering it. 

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

This is pointless. The SCONC will flip anyway and republicans will draw another gerrymander mid decade

There’s no downside for us; why not fight it in court and see what we can get?

This.  It's also unconstitutional in NC to redraw the state legislative districts mid-decade, so if either of those maps get thrown out, the changes will stick.  Dems could plausibly flip a chamber over the course of the decade.

Did they explicitly forbid it? If not, this will be up to the likely GOP SC in 2022.

It says the process is done at the first legislative session after the census is released. 

Have you checked TX, GA, NV constitutions? I believe such language should be there as well. I am curious which state does not have this type of language.

TX and NV have this language for the legislative districts.  Georgia’s language is a bit more open.

Mid-decade legislative redistricting is clearly allowed in GA, as they made some minor changes through the normal legislative process in the late 2010's without a court ordering it. 

Yep.

[David Hume]

This is pointless. The SCONC will flip anyway and republicans will draw another gerrymander mid decade

There’s no downside for us; why not fight it in court and see what we can get?

This.  It's also unconstitutional in NC to redraw the state legislative districts mid-decade, so if either of those maps get thrown out, the changes will stick.  Dems could plausibly flip a chamber over the course of the decade.

Did they explicitly forbid it? If not, this will be up to the likely GOP SC in 2022.

It says the process is done at the first legislative session after the census is released. 

Have you checked TX, GA, NV constitutions? I believe such language should be there as well. I am curious which state does not have this type of language.

TX and NV have this language for the legislative districts.  Georgia’s language is a bit more open.

TX did this back in 2000s. NV threatened to do this in 2010s. Hence I don't think such languages are major obstacles, especially with a friendly court.

[Mr.Phips]

This is pointless. The SCONC will flip anyway and republicans will draw another gerrymander mid decade

There’s no downside for us; why not fight it in court and see what we can get?

This.  It's also unconstitutional in NC to redraw the state legislative districts mid-decade, so if either of those maps get thrown out, the changes will stick.  Dems could plausibly flip a chamber over the course of the decade.

Did they explicitly forbid it? If not, this will be up to the likely GOP SC in 2022.

It says the process is done at the first legislative session after the census is released. 

Have you checked TX, GA, NV constitutions? I believe such language should be there as well. I am curious which state does not have this type of language.

TX and NV have this language for the legislative districts.  Georgia’s language is a bit more open.

TX did this back in 2000s. NV threatened to do this in 2010s. Hence I don't think such languages are major obstacles, especially with a friendly court.

TX did it for the congressional lines, not the legislative lines.  The legislative lines are to be drawn in the first session after the census in TX.  The constitution in TX is silent on the congressional line drawing timing.

[Vern]

So what do you think the map would look like if the courts throw this one out?

[Antonio the Sixth]

So what do you think the map would look like if the courts throw this one out?

Hopefully like the 2020 map with an additional competitive seat thrown in the mix.

[Brittain33]

So what do you think the map would look like if the courts throw this one out?

Hopefully like the 2020 map with an additional competitive seat thrown in the mix.

Yes, expect a Winston-Salem / Greensboro seat and a more Democratic AA district in the northeast. Not sure what other changes.

[Gass3268]

So what do you think the map would look like if the courts throw this one out?

Hopefully like the 2020 map with an additional competitive seat thrown in the mix.

Yes, expect a Winston-Salem / Greensboro seat and a more Democratic AA district in the northeast. Not sure what other changes.

An actual Sandhills district?

[Sol]

Court drawn NC maps are interesting because there are 7 obvious and easy to draw districts in the eastern half of the state (the triangle and points east and south) but only enough people for 6 districts. A fair map has to choose one of these self-evidently reasonable districts to destroy.

For the record, the obvious districts are:
A. A northeastern NC Black influence district (NC-02)--this would be the obvious seat to destroy if this were say, UK redistricting rules, since it lost population and isn't a super strong CoI. But that in practice is both racially discriminatory and probably violates the VRA so a fair map shouldn't do it IMO.
B. A coastal district north of Wilmington (NC-01)--this district has the outer banks and New Bern and potentially some of various small inland cities depending on how exactly you finesse the lines with the 1st.
C. A Wilmington-based district (NC-03): Something based in New Hanover, Brunswick, and Pender, plus various adjacent rurals or Onslow/Carteret.
D. A Sandhills/Fayetteville district (split up currently between 3, 4, and : Something based in the core of Fayetteville and the Lumbee community.
E. An exurban Raleigh district (split up between 4, 5, 6, and 7): Something based in the outer parts of Wake plus various neighboring exurbs, like Johnston.
F. A Raleigh district (5)
G. A Durham and Chapel Hill based seat, also ideally could take in Chatham as well as Granville.

So the art of drawing any map of NC comes down to decide which one of these you want to utterly destroy.

Certain combos work better than others but all have bad effects. Combining B+E and C+E gives you decent district outside of the combination in the east, but forces a lot of the Triangle into a seat based in the Piedmont, either messing with G or with a logical rural Piedmont seat.

Dicing up D between C and E, with Fayetteville going to the latter, has a certain elegance and logic (possibly the best option in terms of CoI?), but also dilutes minority influence and sort of functions as a Republican gerrymander. It also forces population westward out of the Triangle.

Destroying either F or G, by dipping A into Raleigh or Durham, doesn't have that same problem but creates an obviously bizarre district. Cracking Durham is easier because Raleigh is quite white.

Some options don't work very well--in particular B+C is overpopulated without an obvious place to remove people and preserve contiguity.

So yeah, this is the fundamental problem of NC redistricting--which logical community do you absolutely destroy?

[ProgressiveModerate]

A trial seems likely to be held at this point and is scheduled for early January.

My question is if the NC SC overturns the maps, will they draw them themselves, or will they kick them back to the legistlature, and if they do, will the legistlature just keep redrawing gerrymanders tht technically fix what the court wants but maximizes their advantage.?

[ProgressiveModerate]

Schedule

[Stuart98]

Court drawn NC maps are interesting because there are 7 obvious and easy to draw districts in the eastern half of the state (the triangle and points east and south) but only enough people for 6 districts. A fair map has to choose one of these self-evidently reasonable districts to destroy.

For the record, the obvious districts are:
A. A northeastern NC Black influence district (NC-02)--this would be the obvious seat to destroy if this were say, UK redistricting rules, since it lost population and isn't a super strong CoI. But that in practice is both racially discriminatory and probably violates the VRA so a fair map shouldn't do it IMO.
B. A coastal district north of Wilmington (NC-01)--this district has the outer banks and New Bern and potentially some of various small inland cities depending on how exactly you finesse the lines with the 1st.
C. A Wilmington-based district (NC-03): Something based in New Hanover, Brunswick, and Pender, plus various adjacent rurals or Onslow/Carteret.
D. A Sandhills/Fayetteville district (split up currently between 3, 4, and : Something based in the core of Fayetteville and the Lumbee community.
E. An exurban Raleigh district (split up between 4, 5, 6, and 7): Something based in the outer parts of Wake plus various neighboring exurbs, like Johnston.
F. A Raleigh district (5)
G. A Durham and Chapel Hill based seat, also ideally could take in Chatham as well as Granville.

So the art of drawing any map of NC comes down to decide which one of these you want to utterly destroy.

Certain combos work better than others but all have bad effects. Combining B+E and C+E gives you decent district outside of the combination in the east, but forces a lot of the Triangle into a seat based in the Piedmont, either messing with G or with a logical rural Piedmont seat.

Dicing up D between C and E, with Fayetteville going to the latter, has a certain elegance and logic (possibly the best option in terms of CoI?), but also dilutes minority influence and sort of functions as a Republican gerrymander. It also forces population westward out of the Triangle.

Destroying either F or G, by dipping A into Raleigh or Durham, doesn't have that same problem but creates an obviously bizarre district. Cracking Durham is easier because Raleigh is quite white.

Some options don't work very well--in particular B+C is overpopulated without an obvious place to remove people and preserve contiguity.

So yeah, this is the fundamental problem of NC redistricting--which logical community do you absolutely destroy?

How do you feel about  my solution to the problem?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Court drawn NC maps are interesting because there are 7 obvious and easy to draw districts in the eastern half of the state (the triangle and points east and south) but only enough people for 6 districts. A fair map has to choose one of these self-evidently reasonable districts to destroy.

For the record, the obvious districts are:
A. A northeastern NC Black influence district (NC-02)--this would be the obvious seat to destroy if this were say, UK redistricting rules, since it lost population and isn't a super strong CoI. But that in practice is both racially discriminatory and probably violates the VRA so a fair map shouldn't do it IMO.
B. A coastal district north of Wilmington (NC-01)--this district has the outer banks and New Bern and potentially some of various small inland cities depending on how exactly you finesse the lines with the 1st.
C. A Wilmington-based district (NC-03): Something based in New Hanover, Brunswick, and Pender, plus various adjacent rurals or Onslow/Carteret.
D. A Sandhills/Fayetteville district (split up currently between 3, 4, and : Something based in the core of Fayetteville and the Lumbee community.
E. An exurban Raleigh district (split up between 4, 5, 6, and 7): Something based in the outer parts of Wake plus various neighboring exurbs, like Johnston.
F. A Raleigh district (5)
G. A Durham and Chapel Hill based seat, also ideally could take in Chatham as well as Granville.

So the art of drawing any map of NC comes down to decide which one of these you want to utterly destroy.

Certain combos work better than others but all have bad effects. Combining B+E and C+E gives you decent district outside of the combination in the east, but forces a lot of the Triangle into a seat based in the Piedmont, either messing with G or with a logical rural Piedmont seat.

Dicing up D between C and E, with Fayetteville going to the latter, has a certain elegance and logic (possibly the best option in terms of CoI?), but also dilutes minority influence and sort of functions as a Republican gerrymander. It also forces population westward out of the Triangle.

Destroying either F or G, by dipping A into Raleigh or Durham, doesn't have that same problem but creates an obviously bizarre district. Cracking Durham is easier because Raleigh is quite white.

Some options don't work very well--in particular B+C is overpopulated without an obvious place to remove people and preserve contiguity.

So yeah, this is the fundamental problem of NC redistricting--which logical community do you absolutely destroy?

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f53aa2e9-29cb-49f1-a13a-0c9f47f58e41

Would you say this works? A broader "western parts of the Triangle" seat isn't all that bizarre...

[Antonio the Sixth]

Schedule

Closing arguments on Jan 6th. Probably not intentional, but I gotta appreciate the poetic aspect of it.

[Sol]

How do you feel about  my solution to the problem?

This isn't terrible--I would say it has the same problem that any B+E has in that there's still excess population in the Triangle so some of it gets forced to go into what should be in Piedmont district--in your case exurban Greensboro, which is a decent choice. But a good map!

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f53aa2e9-29cb-49f1-a13a-0c9f47f58e41

Would you say this works? A broader "western parts of the Triangle" seat isn't all that bizarre...

I think you could probably do something to tighten up the boundaries of that red district but yeah, I think it pretty easily illustrates how the very crummy move of putting Durham with the northeast makes a map where a lot of other things work.

[BoiseBoy]

What are the odds this map gets overturned by the court? What would happen next?

[ProgressiveModerate]

What are the odds this map gets overturned by the court? What would happen next?

Overturned, in part of in whole is pretty likely, though not a shoe-in

Thing is though I don’t think the court can actually seize redistricting power in NC so it goes back to leg who prolly draws something that technically is what the court wants to see but is still gerrymandered.

[lfromnj]

What are the odds this map gets overturned by the court? What would happen next?

Overturned, in part of in whole is pretty likely, though not a shoe-in

Thing is though I don’t think the court can actually seize redistricting power in NC so it goes back to leg who prolly draws something that technically is what the court wants to see but is still gerrymandered.

Technically the court can do whatever they want. The leg just has a realistic nuclear option.

[ProgressiveModerate]

What are the odds this map gets overturned by the court? What would happen next?

Overturned, in part of in whole is pretty likely, though not a shoe-in

Thing is though I don’t think the court can actually seize redistricting power in NC so it goes back to leg who prolly draws something that technically is what the court wants to see but is still gerrymandered.

Technically the court can do whatever they want. The leg just has a realistic nuclear option.

Lol imagined getting impeach for using special master to draw a map.

[Virginiá]

Technically the court can do whatever they want. The leg just has a realistic nuclear option.

Lol imagined getting impeach for using special master to draw a map.

This is where our system really starts to fail. There are no repercussions for lawmakers who do this, even though their motives and actions are brazenly corrupt.

[gerritcole]

Technically the court can do whatever they want. The leg just has a realistic nuclear option.

Lol imagined getting impeach for using special master to draw a map.

This is where our system really starts to fail. There are no repercussions for lawmakers who do this, even though their motives and actions are brazenly corrupt.

the repercussions are elections, if voters see no fault with the legislators' actions then so be it

[Brittain33]

Technically the court can do whatever they want. The leg just has a realistic nuclear option.

Lol imagined getting impeach for using special master to draw a map.

This is where our system really starts to fail. There are no repercussions for lawmakers who do this, even though their motives and actions are brazenly corrupt.

the repercussions are elections, if voters see no fault with the legislators' actions then so be it

Do you not understand why that is not a functional tool in NC today?

[Tekken_Guy]

Either it's making Butterfield's seat VRA-friendly again or giving Manning her district back at the expense of one of the open seats (probably not the Mark Walker one, though).