Democrats Are Poised to Wipe Out Republicans' North Carolina Gerrymander In Time for 2020
Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court is unlikely to strike down partisan gerrymanders following Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement. But the plaintiffs did not file their lawsuit in federal court. Instead, they filed in state court, alleging a violation not of the federal Constitution, but of the North Carolina Constitution. They have a very strong case. The North Carolina Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause is more robust than its federal counterpart, guaranteeing citizens “substantially equal voting power” and “the right to vote on equal terms.” It also commands that “[a]ll elections shall be free”—that is, not manipulated by the state to predetermine the outcome. And it safeguards freedom of speech and assembly beyond what the First Amendment provides.
All these constitutional rights, the plaintiffs argue, should prohibit the legislature from engaging in such egregious partisan gerrymandering. The practice dilutes the power of Democratic votes, stripping voters of their right “to vote on equal terms.” It prevents elections from being truly “free” by rigging the outcome in favor of the ruling party, as the Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently ruled in a similar case. And it infringes upon voters’ freedom of expression by discriminating against those who associate with a certain political party. In fact, Republican mapmakers “retaliated” against Democratic voters on the basis of political affiliation, unlawfully burdening their “associational rights” enshrined in the state constitution.
The plaintiffs stand an excellent chance of winning. This case will ultimately be decided by the North Carolina Supreme Court—and the judiciary is the one branch of government largely uncorrupted by GOP chicanery. In 2016, Democrat Michael R. Morgan won a seat on the court, creating a 4–3 majority. Republicans responded by attempting to rig the 2018 election in favor of a Republican incumbent, Justice Barbara Jackson. They abolished judicial primaries, hoping that multiple Democrats would run against Jackson, splitting the liberal vote. Instead, a lawyer named Chris Anglin ran as a Republican, creating a three-way race between Jackson, Anglin, and the Democratic candidate, civil rights attorney Anita Earls. Republicans tried and failed to knock Anglin off the ballot. And on Election Day, Anglin and Jackson split the GOP vote, handing the election to Earls.
As a result, Democrats will soon hold a 5–2 majority on the court. And Earls played a major role challenging earlier GOP gerrymanders. When she announced her candidacy, Earls declared that she sought to shield “the right of all citizens to cast a ballot that is counted equally,” a clear reference to partisan gerrymandering. There is no reason to doubt that she and her Democratic colleagues on the court will be prepared to invalidate the current legislative maps when this case reaches their docket.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/north-carolina-gerrymandering-lawsuit-anita-earls.html?__twitter_impression=true
= new reply since forum marked as read
