The Wisconsin Supreme Court is about to go to war with state Republicans.
Justice Janet Protasiewicz was sworn into the Wisconsin Supreme Court on Tuesday, creating a 4–3 liberal majority after years of conservative domination. By Wednesday, voting rights advocates had filed a lawsuit asking the court to strike down the state’s gerrymandered legislative maps. The other liberal justices have already condemned these maps as an unlawful assault on representative democracy. During her campaign, Protasiewicz decried them as “rigged” and “wrong.” The real question, then, is not if the new majority will strike down these maps, but when.
Right now, Wisconsin’s legislative districts are arguably the most egregiously gerrymandered in the country. The origin of today’s maps lies in the 2010 redistricting cycle, when Wisconsin Republicans used novel technology to gerrymander Democrats into a permanent minority. Mapmakers packed as many Democrats as possible into a few deep-blue districts, then distributed the rest throughout safely red districts, eliminating genuinely competitive elections for the statehouse. Urban areas were ruthlessly carved up to dilute their political power. Mapmakers stuffed Democrats and racial minorities into contorted districts that stretched into conservative rural areas whose GOP voters could always prevail. The plans were so extreme that, in 2018, Democrats won a majority of votes for the state Legislature—and Republicans captured a near-supermajority of seats.
After the 2020 census, the Legislature, still in the grip of this gerrymander, drew new maps that maintained or expanded the partisan bias of the old ones. Because suburban areas were trending blue, for instance, Republican lawmakers added more red, rural voters to suburban districts, restoring the GOP’s advantage for another decade. Democratic Gov. Tony Evers vetoed the map, but the Legislature refused to draw fairer ones; the governor and Legislature then asked the state Supreme Court to resolve this impasse. Democrats urged the court to choose maps that did not benefit either political party. The conservative majority, however, rejected this request, claiming it would ignore all political considerations and favor maps with the “least change” from the old (and heavily gerrymandered) ones. This majority eventually enacted the maps submitted by the state Legislature—the same ones that Evers had vetoed. (There were various side quests to the U.S. Supreme Court, but those are not relevant here.)
Advertisement Advertisement Advertisement AdvertisementRelated From Slate
Mark Joseph Stern
Samuel Alito Just Took an Indefensible Jab at the Progressive Justices
Read MoreThroughout this epic journey, the court’s four conservatives insisted that the Wisconsin Constitution imposed no enforceable limits on partisan gerrymandering. The three liberals disagreed, asserting that courts have an obligation to protect voters’ right to equal participation in representative government. Protasiewicz aligned herself with this view on the campaign trail, and her blowout victory was a kind of mandate to bring democracy back to the Badger State. The fundamental problem with gerrymandering, after all, is that the people can’t vote their way out of it, in the traditional sense of electing new representatives, when legislators have entrenched their power so durably. After the U.S. Supreme Court declined to restrict partisan redistricting, Wisconsinites had just one remaining solution: their state Supreme Court, which remains free to limit gerrymandering under the state constitution. By electing Protasiewicz, voters all but ensured an end to one-party rule over the statehouse.
AdvertisementVoting rights advocates are not wasting any time. Tuesday’s lawsuit—filed by a coalition of groups, including Law Forward and the Campaign Legal Center, on behalf of several voters—urged the court to strike down the existing maps. The plaintiffs were able to take their case directly to the Wisconsin Supreme Court because, under state law, it has original jurisdiction over redistricting disputes. That shortcut eliminates the need for a lengthy trip through the lower courts, increasing the odds of having new maps by 2024.
AdvertisementThe lawsuit argues that the current districts violate the Wisconsin Constitution in several different ways. First, it claims that the maps violate the guarantee of equality by discriminating against voters on the basis of political affiliation. Second, it claims that the maps violate freedom of speech and association by retaliating against voters for “their expression of political views” and impairing their ability “to associate for the advancement of their political beliefs.” Third, it cites the state constitution’s provision requiring “maintenance of free government” through laws that comport with “justice” and “moderation.” Fourth, it accuses the court of violating the separation of powers by adopting a map in 2022 that the governor had previously vetoed.
Advertisement AdvertisementTake a step back and consider what the plaintiffs are saying here. The Wisconsin Constitution explicitly guarantees every citizen an equal right to participate in a “free government.” It also bars the state from penalizing any citizen for exercising their liberty to speak, associate, and assemble freely to promote their political views. And it establishes these rights in far broader language than anything found in the federal Constitution. The case should be easy to make that Republican lawmakers have run afoul of the state constitution by retaliating against voters who associated themselves with the Democratic Party. Lawmakers punished these voters because of their political expression, diluting their votes through an insurmountable gerrymander. And when the chief executive of the state exercised his constitutional authority to reject this gerrymander, the court stepped in and imposed it over his veto.
Advertisement Advertisement AdvertisementOn top of everything else, the plaintiffs have an ace in the hole: The Wisconsin Constitution requires that all legislative districts be made up of “contiguous territory.” Yet a majority of seats in both chambers currently “consist of a patchwork of disconnected pieces that do not share a common border with other parts of the same district.” Rather, tiny pieces of one district are stuffed into others to maximize partisan advantage. The plaintiffs make strong arguments, on originalist and textualist grounds, that the meaning of “contiguous” (sharing a common border) cannot be stretched to include districts that literally do not touch each other. (Past courts have assumed that districts are “legally contiguous” if they follow municipal borders, but the constitution explicitly refers to physical “territory,” not any legal fiction.)
AdvertisementAdvertisement AdvertisementTake a look at the Madison area assembly districts. This violates both @MerriamWebster's word-of-the-day and also Article IV of the Wisconsin Constitution, which requires that districts consist of "contiguous territory." #gerrymander #wisconsin pic.twitter.com/a5tD1xFFAV
— Mark Gaber (@markpgaber) August 2, 2023
If the court finds the maps unconstitutional, the plaintiffs seek relief in two ways. First, they ask the court to forbid the state from holding elections under the current maps in 2024, and to solicit new maps from the parties; the court would then assess the submissions for compliance with the constitution, or appoint a special master to do so. (If no submissions suffice, the special master could draw their own plans.) This approach, though, does not address a looming issue: State senators serve four-year terms, so half of them are not up for reelection until 2026. The plaintiffs therefore ask the court to issue a rare order holding that these senators have “no right to complete a term of office that was unconstitutionally obtained,” and force them to run for reelection in 2024 instead.
AdvertisementPopular in News & Politics
- A Supreme Court Justice Gave Us Alarming New Evidence That He’s Living in MAGA World
- We’ve Been Entertaining an Illusion About the Supreme Court. It’s Finally Been Shattered.
- Them Supreme Court Boys Are at It Again
- In a Week Full of Hypocrites, Greg Abbott Came Close to Winning the Crown
While it seems extraordinarily likely that the court will, indeed, invalidate the maps, the liberal majority may feel uncomfortable halving the terms of sitting state senators. Today, Republicans hold a majority in the state Assembly and a supermajority in the state Senate; the Legislature could thus, in theory, impeach and remove Protasiewicz, or any other liberal justice, who cuts down the gerrymander. (Republican lawmakers have downplayed this threat.) That political reality may be cause for caution—though Gov. Evers could simply replace any justice who loses her seat with another progressive who would carry out her predecessor’s decision. (Replacing a justice does not require Senate confirmation.) If Republicans responded by attempting to remove Evers, the state would fall into a genuine constitutional crisis; such extraordinary, simultaneous assaults on the executive and judicial branches seem highly improbable.
Because this case involves legislative districts rather than congressional ones, the U.S. Supreme Court has absolutely no authority to override the state Supreme Court’s rulings. (We can, though, expect challenges to the gerrymandered congressional map in the future, perhaps after this suit prevails.) GOP legislators can rail against “the rule of Janet,” but they have no cards left to play that will save their skins. Wisconsin’s experiment with subverting democracy is finally drawing to a close.
Tweet Share Share Comment-
We Asked GPT Some Tech Questions, Can You Tell Which Answers Are Human?US extends travel ban on North Korea for another yearSeoul mayor grilled by prosecutors over allegations of election law violation2024:穿越猪业寒冬,必须敬畏市场|农财宝典新牧网新年献词US to oppose North Korean worker dispatch to occupied Ukrainian territory: State Dept.S. Korea to form govt.建生态示范城区 市政配套率先迈出“绿色步子”冬日音乐会,甘薯是绝配!陆丰甘薯集市火力全开送“甜蜜”The Wonderful World of Christmas TreesAussie Smith leads at Kapalua, top
- ·Police bust crypto scammer who received plastic surgery to evade arrest
- ·冬日音乐会,甘薯是绝配!陆丰甘薯集市火力全开送“甜蜜”
- ·市区南外环线塌方点施工预计本月底全面完工
- ·Radeon VII & GeForce RTX 2080 using Ryzen 7 2700X & Core i7
- ·Best tablet deals as of August 27
- ·Mali eye strong AFCON showing
- ·教育设施更完善 食宿学习皆方便
- ·Kavanaugh confirmation: Why Cory Booker's “I Am Spartacus” mattered.
- ·We Asked GPT Some Tech Questions, Can You Tell Which Answers Are Human?
- ·Seoul mayor grilled by prosecutors over allegations of election law violation
- ·Emmys 2020: Check out the full list of winners
- ·FreeSync on Nvidia GPUs Revisited
- ·夜间献血模式“上线”
- ·S. Korea to form govt.
- ·Bizarre 460
- ·增强防范意识 远离电信诈骗
- ·抖音超600万次传播量!广东省农事运动会乡村直播大赛火出圈
- ·整治不文明交通行为 助力文明城市创建
- ·Everything we expect to see at Google's Pixel 4 launch event
- ·North Korea touts close ties with Russia on anniversary of late leader's trip to Far East
- ·The OLED Burn
- ·Ramy Youssef's Emmy loss tweet deserves its own award
- ·最高500元现金!春运期间举报雅西等高速交通违法行为有奖
- ·冬日音乐会,甘薯是绝配!陆丰甘薯集市火力全开送“甜蜜”
- ·When will Trump and Harris debate? The presidential campaigns snipe over ABC News’ rules.
- ·Bernie Sanders not endorsing Cynthia Nixon vs. Andrew Cuomo.
- ·Discover Secret Swimming Holes and Hidden History in Crystal River, Florida
- ·Donald Trump can't stop lying about the 'Tim Apple' flub for some strange reason
- ·Michael Cohen's 'How many times' exchange is now the most relatable meme
- ·超期待!桃花岛公园要修玻璃吊桥啦!
- ·Best Home Depot Labor Day sale deals
- ·早谋划早落实 业务转型实现“开门红”
- ·冻眠荔枝示范项目正式启动,冬天也能实现荔枝自由
- ·下足“绣花”功夫 夯实脱贫基础
- ·Best tablet deals as of August 27
- ·Air Force launches new investigation unit following sexual abuse case