Gerrymandering

Sarah Petersen
What is it?

“Gerrymandering, in U.S. politics, [refers to the]

drawing [of] boundaries of electoral districts in a
way that gives one party an unfair advantage over
its rivals.”1

1
”Gerrymandering,” 2014, https://www.britannica.com/topic/gerrymandering (accessed 15 September, 2018).
3 Different Ways to Divide
50 People into Five Districts

Blue has majority, so blue should win

right?

Wrong.
 Due to
gerrymandering,
situations such as
#3 can exist,
allowing a
minority party to
win an election.
Court Cases Relating
to Gerrymandering
Shaw v. Reno (1993)

● A congressional reapportionment plan was

submitted in North Carolina with one (1)
majority-black district.
● Gets rejected and told a second majority-black
district must be made.
Shaw v. Reno (1993) Cont.

● New plan is submitted with a second

oddly-shaped majority-black district and the
issue is brought to court with the claim that it
violates the 14th Amendment.
● Result: Race cannot be the predominant factor
in creating districts.
Wesberry v. Sanders (1964)

● Georgia’s 5th Congressional district was 2-3

times larger than the others.
● A voter (of the 5th district) noticed this and
complained that his vote was worth less because
of it.
Wesberry v. Sanders (1964) Cont.

● Georgia’s apportionment system was found to

have violated the 14 Amendment by depriving
citizens the full benefits of their right to vote.
● Result: Each state must draw its Congressional
districts so that they are approximately equal in
population.
Gill v. Whitford (2018)

● In 2010, Wisconsin voters elected a Republican

majority in the state assembly and the senate, as
well as a Republican governor.
● A redistricting plan was introduced and passed
in 2011 that would maintain a Republican
majority under any voting scenario.
Gill v. Whitford (2018) Cont.

● Racial gerrymandering has already been

deemed unconstitutional, but what about
partisan gerrymandering?
● The case lacked legal standing in that the
“injury” (how plaintiffs are harmed by what
they’re suing over) and “remedy” (the proposed
solution) mismatched.
Gill v. Whitford (2018) Cont.
● Those who were “harmed” were voters in
particular districts, but the proposed remedy
involved restricting partisan gerrymandering in
Wisconsin as a whole.
● Result: The case was sent back for reargument
in order to give plaintiffs another chance to
establish legal standing for it.