Illinois Redistricting Megathread

[Gracile]

The district 2 judge is appointed and is up for election in 2022,  is that a retention election?

No, it will be a special election (along with District 3). Retention for Supreme Court judges only goes into effect after a judge has been elected in their own right.

[Nyvin]

The district 2 judge is appointed and is up for election in 2022,  is that a retention election?

No, it will be a special election (along with District 3). Retention for Supreme Court judges only goes into effect after a judge has been elected in their own right.

So then a Dem challenger will appear on the ballot for district 2?

[Gracile]

The district 2 judge is appointed and is up for election in 2022,  is that a retention election?

No, it will be a special election (along with District 3). Retention for Supreme Court judges only goes into effect after a judge has been elected in their own right.

So then a Dem challenger will appear on the ballot for district 2?

Yes.

[Donerail]

It is possible to create a map that would be safer for Democrats than the one that's proposed — something like this.



No county splits, no judicial circuit splits, and populations are just about equal.

Seat 1: Cook, safe D
Seat 2 (pop. 1.88 mil): The 16th, 17th, 19th and 22nd judicial circuits, 51-42 for Clinton in 2016 but just 47.1-46.8 in the Senate race. D+3 in the composite. Very moneyed suburban (Lake & friends), if you trust the #trends you’ll trust the seat.
Seat 3 (pop. 1.85 mil): The 12th, 18th, and 23rd circuits, a little safer than the 2nd. 51-41 Clinton, 49-45 for Duckworth in ’16, D+6 in the composite. Shouldn’t be too much trouble.
Seat 4 (pop 1.92 mil): 3, 6–9, 14 and 20. Miserable for Clinton (40-53), but much closer in the Senate race (46-49) and in the composite (R+6). On the board with a decent candidate, perhaps Judy Cates? There is also a bit of a balancing effect here, where historically Dems have done much better here and much worse in the suburbs. Difficult to imagine the scenario where Dems are doing so poorly in the suburbs that they lose 2/3 and so poorly downstate that they lose this seat (especially since the staggered terms help insulate you from the effects of any fluke years).
Seat 5 (pop. 1.92 mil): all the other circuits, GOP+28 apocalypse hellzone

Compared to the proposed map, I extended the Lake seat into the Winnebago-Boone circuit and dropped the DeKalb-Kendall (23rd) circuit; there isn't too much of a population shift here, and the 23rd is only 3 points more Dem than the Winnebago circuit so partisan performance doesn't decline too much (Clinton's share only drops a point, Trump's stays the same). This lets you put the 23rd in the 3rd district — it has the same population as the LaSalle-Peru and Kankakee circuits combined, and is substantially more Dem, so the 3rd goes to Clinton+10 instead of +6. Adding the Metro East and Champagne to the downstate district shifts it a point more Dem & more than compensates for the loss of Rockford.

I honestly don't think it's that hideous either, though the weird Champagne bulge (that's the shape of the circuit) and the 5th going from Cairo to Galena are obviously not great.

[Skill and Chance]

https://mobile.twitter.com/PoliticsWolf/status/1397276455508135936

Considering judicial races are closer to 2018 gov still, this doesn't really lock down the court for Ds. Definitely a major help but not an instant win.  The only way to really lock it down is to do my map above.

It depends on how well Biden #'s predict the future.  If the Biden coalition transfers downballot, this will easily be a 5D/2R court after the next open elections in districts 2 and 3, and both the outer Chicago districts will only get safer with time.  However, Pritzker just barely won both of those seats in 2018 and they were shakier for Clinton in 2016. 

BTW this isn't particularly egregious from a gerrymandering perspective.  The previous districts were drawn in the 1960's and are now grossly malapportioned (SCOTUS never extended Reynolds and Wesberry to judicial districts) and the median seat on this new map still voted well right of the state. The latter is basically inevitable for now as the state constitution prohibits county splits, hence the 3 seat Cook district.   

[lfromnj]

https://mobile.twitter.com/PoliticsWolf/status/1397276455508135936

Considering judicial races are closer to 2018 gov still, this doesn't really lock down the court for Ds. Definitely a major help but not an instant win.  The only way to really lock it down is to do my map above.

It depends on how well Biden #'s predict the future.  If the Biden coalition transfers downballot, this will easily be a 5D/2R court after the next open elections in districts 2 and 3, and both the outer Chicago districts will only get safer with time.  However, Pritzker just barely won both of those seats in 2018 and they were shakier for Clinton in 2016. 

BTW this isn't particularly egregious from a gerrymandering perspective.  The previous districts were drawn in the 1960's and are now grossly malapportioned (SCOTUS never extended Reynolds and Wesberry to judicial districts) and the median seat on this new map still voted well right of the state. The latter is basically inevitable for now as the state constitution prohibits county splits, hence the 3 seat Cook district.   

This isn't a gerrymander at all. IMO its close to what Texas Rs are pushing for equal polling places per registered voter. Partisan intent perhaps but its merely just "fixing" an advantage the other party had.

[Torie]

https://mobile.twitter.com/PoliticsWolf/status/1397276455508135936
Considering judicial races are closer to 2018 gov still, this doesn't really lock down the court for Ds. Definitely a major help but not an instant win.  The only way to really lock it down is to do my map above.

It depends on how well Biden #'s predict the future.  If the Biden coalition transfers downballot, this will easily be a 5D/2R court after the next open elections in districts 2 and 3, and both the outer Chicago districts will only get safer with time.  However, Pritzker just barely won both of those seats in 2018 and they were shakier for Clinton in 2016. 

BTW this isn't particularly egregious from a gerrymandering perspective.  The previous districts were drawn in the 1960's and are now grossly malapportioned (SCOTUS never extended Reynolds and Wesberry to judicial districts) and the median seat on this new map still voted well right of the state. The latter is basically inevitable for now as the state constitution prohibits county splits, hence the 3 seat Cook district.   

Using the better ACS population figures (ala the DRA) than the 2020 census estimates for population, it's time to file a lawsuit.

The districts have more than a 10% deviation when they need not. One person, one vote should apply for judicial districts when the races are partisan, and the judges go partisan when they rule on partisan cases such as gerrymandering cases time after time. In Illinois, the deviation can be reduced to below 10%, by adding another county to the Cook County 3 judges district.

[Torie]

And Cook County aside, what is the rational for not moving some counties from the most over populated district, district 4, to the most underpopulated outside Cook, and in fact in the entire state by far, district 2, other than that they are all Pub?

[lfromnj]

And Cook County aside, what is the rational for not moving some counties from the most over populated district, district 4, to the most underpopulated outside Cook, and in fact in the entire state by far, district 2, other than that they are all Pub?

Putting Winnebago and the other county would make 2 more overpopulated than the rest so that doesn't matter. If you put the rurals in the NW of the state then you block off Winnebago.  Also splitting Cook is literally not allowed .

[Torie]

And Cook County aside, what is the rational for not moving some counties from the most over populated district, district 4, to the most underpopulated outside Cook, and in fact in the entire state by far, district 2, other than that they are all Pub?

Putting Winnebago and the other county would make 2 more overpopulated than the rest so that doesn't matter. If you put the rurals in the NW of the state then you block off Winnebago.  Also splitting Cook is literally not allowed .

You can add other counties than Winnebago in 2 to mitigate matters. Heck you can start by moving little old Boone County. You can also rearrange the ex Cook array of counties overall to reduce population deviation. Cook is not split, it just adds another county to that district. The split in Cook is to illustrate the arithmetic. It is not real. All that aside, can a state have rules that force a more than 10% deviation in district size per judge as it were? SCOTUS needs to tell us for judicial districts for partisan judges in particular.

[Nyvin]

And Cook County aside, what is the rational for not moving some counties from the most over populated district, district 4, to the most underpopulated outside Cook, and in fact in the entire state by far, district 2, other than that they are all Pub?

Putting Winnebago and the other county would make 2 more overpopulated than the rest so that doesn't matter. If you put the rurals in the NW of the state then you block off Winnebago.  Also splitting Cook is literally not allowed .

You can add other counties than Winnebago in 2 to mitigate matters. Heck you can start by moving little old Boone County. You can also rearrange the ex Cook array of counties overall to reduce population deviation. Cook is not split, it just adds another county to that district. The split in Cook is to illustrate the arithmetic. It is not real. All that aside, can a state have rules that force a more than 10% deviation in district size per judge as it were? SCOTUS needs to tell us for judicial districts for partisan judges in particular.

They matched the lines to the circuit court boundaries.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_circuit_courts

[Skill and Chance]

And Cook County aside, what is the rational for not moving some counties from the most over populated district, district 4, to the most underpopulated outside Cook, and in fact in the entire state by far, district 2, other than that they are all Pub?

Putting Winnebago and the other county would make 2 more overpopulated than the rest so that doesn't matter. If you put the rurals in the NW of the state then you block off Winnebago.  Also splitting Cook is literally not allowed .

You can add other counties than Winnebago in 2 to mitigate matters. Heck you can start by moving little old Boone County. You can also rearrange the ex Cook array of counties overall to reduce population deviation. Cook is not split, it just adds another county to that district. The split in Cook is to illustrate the arithmetic. It is not real. All that aside, can a state have rules that force a more than 10% deviation in district size per judge as it were? SCOTUS needs to tell us for judicial districts for partisan judges in particular.

As far as I know, there is no population standard for judicial districts, even when states have partisan judicial elections.  Texas has partisan judicial elections.  It has a sparsely populated Panhandle appeals court district and another district at the same level with the entire Houston metro area in it.  

[Torie]

And Cook County aside, what is the rational for not moving some counties from the most over populated district, district 4, to the most underpopulated outside Cook, and in fact in the entire state by far, district 2, other than that they are all Pub?

Putting Winnebago and the other county would make 2 more overpopulated than the rest so that doesn't matter. If you put the rurals in the NW of the state then you block off Winnebago.  Also splitting Cook is literally not allowed .

You can add other counties than Winnebago in 2 to mitigate matters. Heck you can start by moving little old Boone County. You can also rearrange the ex Cook array of counties overall to reduce population deviation. Cook is not split, it just adds another county to that district. The split in Cook is to illustrate the arithmetic. It is not real. All that aside, can a state have rules that force a more than 10% deviation in district size per judge as it were? SCOTUS needs to tell us for judicial districts for partisan judges in particular.

As far as I know, there is no population standard for judicial districts, even when states have partisan judicial elections.  Texas has partisan judicial elections.  It has a sparsely populated Panhandle appeals court district and another district at the same level with the entire Houston metro area in it.  

Not yet, but I have not yet found a SCOTUS case on the topic. The next issue is whether they moved circuit court districts around in a way that minimized the population deviation.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Just realized that IL Dems could have produced a certain safe Dem majority by adding one or two new counties to the Cook district and making it a 4-seater.
EDIT: Apparently not, NVM.

[Skill and Chance]

Just realized that IL Dems could have produced a certain safe Dem majority by adding one or two new counties to the Cook district and making it a 4-seater.
EDIT: Apparently not, NVM.

Why would that not be allowed?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Just realized that IL Dems could have produced a certain safe Dem majority by adding one or two new counties to the Cook district and making it a 4-seater.
EDIT: Apparently not, NVM.

Why would that not be allowed?

Illinois is divided under 5 districts for purposes of Supreme Court elections under the 1970 constitution.

[Donerail]

Not yet, but I have not yet found a SCOTUS case on the topic. The next issue is whether they moved circuit court districts around in a way that minimized the population deviation.

They did not — using Winnebago/Boone produces a smaller deviation than the current configuration with Kendall/DeKalb.

[Devils30]

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1399859335329636356

[Green Line]

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1399859335329636356

Wow, disgusting and evil.

What is with the purple district snaking around the 4th district like that.  Its just gratuitous.

[OBD]

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1399859335329636356

Beautiful!

The people demand a 14-3!

[Nyvin]

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1399859335329636356

o_O

I hope they know that IL has one of the earliest release dates for maps so they kinda set the precedent for the country.  

I'm not a fan of this honestly.

[Florida Man for Crime]

Dems should be smart and simply draw IL-17 into Chicagoland. You don't even have to draw it deep into Chicagoland to secure it, drawing it into somewhere like Waukegan or even some outlying areas like DeKalb or Elgin would probably be sufficient.

Of course, if they were smart they would also draw a 16-1 map (or 17-0, but maybe that would legitimately get too dicey with the VRA districts), or maybe 15-2 map if they are feeling generous (this can be done by simply baconmandering the whole state in an absurd and ridiculous manner), so I wouldn't expect too much.

[Florida Man for Crime]

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1399859335329636356

o_O

I hope they know that IL has one of the earliest release dates for maps so they kinda set the precedent for the country.  

I'm not a fan of this honestly.

In that case, they should draw a 17-0 map and make sure that the shapes of one of the districts spells out "F**k you SCOTUS" to try to bait SCOTUS into overturning the map and setting a precedent against partisan gerrymandering.

[Nyvin]

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1399859335329636356

o_O

I hope they know that IL has one of the earliest release dates for maps so they kinda set the precedent for the country.  

I'm not a fan of this honestly.

In that case, they should draw a 17-0 map and make sure that the shapes of one of the districts spells out "F**k you SCOTUS" to try to bait SCOTUS into overturning the map and setting a precedent against partisan gerrymandering.

Yeah, maybe the horrible map can be used to say "if you don't like it, pass HR1!"

[Brittain33]

New York, you gonna let Illinois rub your nose in how useless you are? Get to it.