The State of Redistricting

I am not entirely sure when the "blog article drought" is going to completely end (when we go back to daily articles), but it's going to at least start to rain this upcoming week on the blog as I am moving toward having a bit more drive in my life post-Labor Day.  We're going to start out this return with a BIG political article (mostly because I know some of the OVP articles are going to come next).  2024 is shaping up to be one of the most intense mid-decade redistricting cycles in recent memory (in part due to former President Trump's inability to get the census done on time), and there are a lot of moving pieces across about a dozen states.  I've recapped below where each of them are at, my thoughts on the current state of play, and which incumbents/parties might be most impacted by these redraws.  Enjoy!

Rep. Barry Moore (R-AL)

Alabama: One of a few states this week with huge news, Alabama feels like the biggest deal right now, and the state most certain to end up with a gain for the Democrats specifically.  A three-judge federal panel (including two Trump-appointed justices) ruled that the Alabama state legislature had not followed the direction of the Supreme Court in the Allen v. Milligan case, which had found the state had violated the Voting Rights Act (VRA) by not drawing a second, Black-majority district in a state where only 16% of the delegation is Black but 33% of the citizenry is.

This means that the state's maps will be drawn by a special master (essentially by the Courts), and will result in a map with two blue districts-likely one that will have an anchor in Birmingham, and the second in the Black Belt region of the state including Selma, Montgomery, & Mobile.  This will likely mean that Rep. Barry Moore, a second-term Republican, will be drawn into a district he cannot possibly win.  Republicans are banking on once-again running out the clock, or going to the Supreme Court in hopes of getting Brett Kavanaugh to change his mind...but honestly, I think they overplayed their hand here, and they're going to end up with two safe blue districts as a result.

Arkansas: There is no movement on this case that I'm finding in recent months.  I'll be honest-of all of the cases right now, this is the one that feels the least likely to succeed in terms of shifting partisan balance.  There's no doubt that Arkansas is drawn unfairly (the Little Rock metro area is drawn into three different districts for a reason), but honestly the state is so red at this point, even if it got a fair map, it'd probably be, at best, a fourth seat that's competitive in blue wave elections.  I doubt this goes anywhere.

Rep. Al Lawson (D-FL)

Florida: In something of a surprise, the Leon County Circuit Court ruled the Florida congressional redistricting plan to be unconstitutional this past week, setting up a showdown at the Florida Supreme Court to see if we could get a new map next year.  The Democrats conceded a lot (they basically focused their entire argument on one district when initially they wanted a more expansive court case focusing on other regions of the state), but they got to continue pushing forward here specifically over whether there could be a redraw of the House districts around Jacksonville, the state's largest city, which historically has elected at least one Democrat (most recently Al Lawson) in the city that is 31% African-American.  The Florida Supreme Court is very conservative, so this would still be a tough case, but the Democrats have decent standing and have won cases similar to this.  Republican Rep. Aaron Bean, who won his first term last year, would be the odd-man-out if there was a redraw, with Lawson (who ran a quixotic bid last year for reelection) getting rite-of-first-refusal if another blue district emerges in the area.

Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA)

Georgia: Georgia has a multi-level case, involving suing both for an additional Black-majority congressional district as well as several more Black-majority districts in the State House & Senate.  The state added 500,000 new Black residents in the past decade, but no new congressional districts for Black voters in 2020 in both Congress & the State Senate (and only two in the State House).  

The case here is a bit harder to prove, though.  For starters, this isn't clear-cut in the way that Alabama & Louisiana are in assuming that the state violated the VRA.  For example, while Alabama only has 16% of its congressional seats decided by Black voters (while they make up 33% of the state's population), 36% of Georgia's congressional districts are made up of Black members of Congress (on par with the 33% of the state that is African-American).  This isn't to say that the state can't draw another Black majority district in the Atlanta suburbs (it can) or that it's not gerrymandered (it is), but it's more that the state should have another blue district in the Atlanta suburbs rather than another VRA district, something you'll see is a sub-trend in a lot of these states.  Given that there's no federal or state protection against partisan gerrymandering in Georgia, the only route they can go is the VRA...I'm curious to see if this works, but it's more of a stretch than Alabama, Louisiana, or even Florida.  If they are successful, it's entirely possible we'd see a situation similar to Florida where a former member of Congress (Carolyn Bourdeaux) drawn out last time runs again, with a Republican who gained as a result (Barry Loudermilk) getting the boot.

Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY)

Kentucky: This one is a bit harder to find information on than some of the other states.  There does still appear to be a State Supreme Court case in Kentucky, so it's not dead, but it's low on the list.  This would not be a VRA violation, but it would be potentially a violation of Kentucky's Constitution (specifically the Free and Equal Elections Clause).  The argument from Democrats is that the current map used partisan gerrymandering (which based on some readings of the state Constitution is illegal) to include Franklin County into the first congressional district, which spreads all the way into southwest Kentucky to form a "hook."  If successful, similar to Arkansas, the new lines probably wouldn't draw a second safe blue district, but you'd get a purple one around the Lexington-Fayette metropolitan area that, while Joe Biden wouldn't have won it, Andy Beshear would've, and would put Rep. Andy Barr in jeopardy against a moderate Democrat.  This feels like a longshot even if, again, the state is very obviously (a lower court judge said as much) a partisan gerrymander.

Gary Chambers (D-LA)

Louisiana: In June, the Supreme Court refused to hear a Louisiana court case that would've potentially staved off a redraw in the state.  Though Republicans are still appealing (the next court case starts October 6th), I think it's becoming increasingly plausible that Louisiana gets the Democrats a second congressional pickup due to the VRA.  Most proposed maps I've seen would split New Orleans and Baton Rouge into separate districts (currently they're combined), and get the Democrats one very blue district and a second medium blue district. 

While Republicans have talked about a potential general election clash between Rep. Julia Letlow (R) and progressive activist Gary Chambers (D) being a tight race, I'm not buying it.  Chambers would potentially be vulnerable in a red wave midterm (I think he'd be significantly to the left of his district), but in a presidential election I don't see a way a fair VRA district would stop him.  If this redraw isn't held off this cycle, it's probable that Chambers will join Troy Carter (who beat him in a 2021 special election) in the House come 2025.

New Mexico: New Mexico is a unique situation where it's the only court case that's alleging that Democrats, not Republicans, gerrymandered the state.  Specifically, the Republicans are stating that the 2nd Congressional district, which went to Rep. Gabe Vasquez in 2022 (over Republican incumbent Yvette Herrell) violated the state constitution's Equal Protection Clause.  The new map does shift some of the liberal neighborhoods around Albuquerque into the congressional district (ensuring that the seat would've been won by Joe Biden in 2020 where a more compact map would've given us a slim Trump district), but the state Supreme Court (which is filled with Democrats) seem to be setting a pretty high bar over whether or not they will redraw.  Vasquez & Herrell are likely to face a rematch in 2024, but without a redraw, it's hard to see the Democratic incumbent losing in a presidential year.

Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY)

New York: We're now moving from court cases to a likely redraw.  In 2022, Democrats (led by Gov. Kathy Hochul) drew an aggressive gerrymander of the state, which would've resulted in a probable 22D-4R map.  However, the New York Court of Appeals overruled the gerrymander 4-3, leading to a much tougher map, and on-top of Hochul's underwhelming election victory, the map ended up being 15D-11R, one of the worst results for Democrats in eons in the Empire State.

Hochul, though, has replaced one of the judges (Chief Justice Janet DiFiore) with a much more liberal judge, and it's likely they can get away with a redraw next year.  It's probable that if they get the chance to redraw, the Democrats could pick up as many as six Republican-held seats (the 22D-4R map seems unlikely to go into effect given shifting voting patterns in Brooklyn, as I suspect they'll leave Nicole Malliotakis' Staten Island seat alone as a vote sink).  Nicholas LaLota, George Santos, Anthony D'Esposito, Mike Lawler, Marc Molinaro, & Brandon Williams, all of whom already represent Biden-won seats, could move into considerably bluer districts (it would be pretty easy to draw them all into districts that Biden won by double-digits, almost certainly a death knell for each of them in a presidential year).  Still a lot of room here (New York Democrats have a history of incompetence, and honestly D'Esposito & Lawler proved last year they know how to win in double-digit Biden districts), but this might be the biggest honeypot for the Democrats.

Rep. Don Davis (D-NC)

North Carolina: If you're reading this and thinking it's largely sunny news for Democrats, it is.  Almost all of the court cases in 2023 are focusing on undoing Republican gerrymanders rather than going after Democratic gerrymanders (and yes, they very much exist, though without VRA violations, they're harder to get overturned in court).  But in North Carolina, Republicans are on the offense.  After conservatives won the state Supreme Court in 2022, the court-drawn maps of last year will be thrown out, and with complete control of the legislature and courts (Gov. Roy Cooper doesn't have veto power over the process).  As a result, Republicans will target 3-4 incumbents and draw as strong of a gerrymander as they possibly can to gain the upper-hand in the state.  This means that incumbents like Reps. Kathy Manning, Wiley Nickel, & Jeff Jackson are almost certainly going to be drawn into inhospitable territory; Jackson has even said as much (I subscribe to his newsletter, and he did a video on it), and is rumored to be looking at a run for NC Attorney General instead next year.  

The one question mark in the Tarheel State is if they go after Rep. Don Davis.  North Carolina is only about 20% African-American, but without Davis, only 14% of the state would have African-American representation.  Davis's district would be easy to gerrymander (getting Republicans a fourth pickup), but it has the second highest African-American population in the state, and drawing Davis out could risk a VRA lawsuit (I'd pretty much guarantee one would pop--up).  If they were smart, they'd quite frankly draw Davis a VRA district (it'd be pretty easy to do) to make the rest of the map harder to overrule in the future; not doing so could put them in a situation where a Court forces them to keep the existing lines for all districts, rather than risk a VRA violation (the fact that there are existing maps would make that easy in a way it wouldn't have been in 2022).  Going after four seats rather than three could put the entire enterprise at risk, and would be a major headache for Republicans already facing tough headwinds to hold the House.

Rep. Emilia Sykes (D-OH)

Ohio: One of the biggest reasons I decided to write this today was because of Ohio.  In the state, the Supreme Court today ruled that the partisan gerrymander that was in place in 2022 will stay in effect until 2026.  This sounds bad on the surface, given that the partisan gerrymander is costing Dems at least one seat, possibly as many as three.  But if you read below the surface, it's actually a good thing.  Republicans hold control of both houses of the state legislature right now, and could draw a much more aggressive gerrymander, one that would ensure Democratic incumbents Greg Landsman, Emilia Sykes, & Marcy Kaptur would have no shot of winning again in 2024.  Without a redraw, Landsman is pretty much assured victory in a presidential year, and Sykes & Kaptur would start out as favorites to hold their seats (Kaptur will probably represent a district Donald Trump will win, but she is kind of a magician when it comes to crossover voting, so as long as she runs, I'd bet on her).

The big question here is whether the Democrats can get an independent redistricting commission on the ballot in 2024.  A recent ballot initiative ensured that if they did, and it passed with just 50%, they'd be able to have this in effect in 2026.  Ohio is an increasingly red state, but a fair map would likely give the Democrats a shot at a 50/50 split of the congressional districts.  A compact map would give Landsman a solid blue district in Cincinnati (rather than one that's at risk in a red wave), Kaptur a seat that Biden would be favored to win (albeit by a slim margin in a red-trending region of the state), and give Sykes a safer seat in Akron.  It'd also give the Democrats an extra seat in Columbus, and a swing seat in Dayton they could win in a wave.  Essentially if this passed, the current five seats the Democrats have would be their floor, and they'd be looking at seven seats in a neutral year, putting Republicans like Michael Turner & Mike Carey at risk.

Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC)

South Carolina: South Carolina is the one state on this list we know will be going to the Supreme Court (in October), which is all-the-more-reason to follow it because its decision could impact races in other corners of the country.  The case (Alexander vs. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP) alleges that the state's 1st congressional district (held by Rep. Nancy Mace) violates the Voting Rights Act.  South Carolina has an African-American population of 25% (compared to its congressional delegation, which only has a 14% representation of African-American districts), so you could make a sincere argument that there should be another Democrat in the state.  The Republicans in the state did gerrymander a lot of Black voters who had initially been in Mace's district (she won the tossup seat in 2020 before it was redrawn) by shoving Charleston County in the 6th congressional district (already represented by Rep. Jim Clyburn, the delegation's sole Democrat).  However, South Carolina is= difficult to draw VRA districts in because the Black population in the state is more spread out (Clyburn's district doesn't even have a 50% African-American population anymore), and so a second VRA district would be a reach.  You could definitely draw a more compact map than what is currently in place and introduce at least one more tossup or blue-leaning district (that would be a fairer map), but without federal laws banning gerrymandering, it's doubtful that the Democrats can win this case in the same way they did Alabama & Louisiana.

Rep. Beth van Duyne (R-TX)

Texas: Of all of the states on this list, no situation appears to be more convoluted than the one in Texas.  This is because unlike most of the cases on this list, which are going after one additional contest, Texas's is looking after a number of different seats, both in the Rio Grande Valley, as well as some around the metropolitan areas of the state (specifically Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston).  There's no doubt that the congressional districts in Texas are drawn in a way that amount to gerrymandering (the districts held by Chip Roy, Beth van Duyne, & Michael McCaul are a joke), but it's not clear that any of the seats, including Monica de la Cruz in the Rio Grande Valley, actually violate the Voting Rights Act, particularly in a way that would hold up in Court.  This feels more like a partisan gerrymander than something that violates the law in Texas or nationally.  This is worth paying attention to because there are so many lawsuits piling up in Texas, one might stick, but this is not high on the priority list for the Democrats because it feels like an uphill climb.

Celeste Maloy (R-UT)

Utah: Next is Utah, where Democrats are going after perhaps the most aggressive gerrymander in the country.  The state is a conservative bastion (it's very, very red), but it has one giant blue spot-Salt Lake City, which given the state's population, should have its own congressional district, one represented by a Democrat.  Here, the debate isn't over the VRA (Utah is a very white state, this wouldn't be an angle for Democrats to win with), but whether the map violates the state Constitution.  In 2018, Utah's voters dictated that they wanted an independent commission to draw the maps, but the legislature superseded that, and passed a map that would ensure four red districts in the state.

I don't think that this is a case that will go to the Democrats, even if the merits are pretty sound (if the people come together, decide to pass a law mandating an independent commission, the legislature overrules them because it limits their power, & the judiciary upholds that...isn't that just a dictatorship?), but if it does, it would be a big deal for Democrats.  All three of the maps that the independent commission brought forward before they were overruled had one district that would go for Biden in 2024 (and did in 2020), but it's hard to tell which Republican would draw the short straw to allow for a Democratic representative.  It's possible Celeste Maloy, who just won the primary election for the open seat vacated by Rep. Chris Stewart, could be the easiest casualty if the Utah judiciary backs state law.

Wisconsin: Our final state is Wisconsin, a state where technically there's no lawsuit yet for congressional districts (the redistricting lawsuit is focused on the more urgent issue of redrawing the gerrymanders in the state legislature).  I kind of want to do a larger article about the issue of Wisconsin later this weekend, so I'm not going to expound on this too much other than to say that with the Democrats having a majority in the Supreme Court, it seems certain that a congressional lawsuit is coming, and could result in 1-2 more blue districts in the state, putting Reps. Derrick van Orden & Bryan Steil at risk.