Redistricting redo: Court of Appeals strikes down district lines
/
New York’s congressional and State Senate primary elections will likely have to be pushed back from June until August after the Court of Appeals ruled that the state’s districting lines violated the constitution on Wednesday, April 27, 2022. Eagle file photo by Jacob Kaye
By Jacob Kaye
New York’s highest court ordered the state to throw out its recently drawn congressional and State Senate district maps in a split decision issued Wednesday.
The 4-3 decision from the Court of Appeals confirmed the opinion of Steuben County Supreme Court Judge Patrick F. McAllister, and said that state Democrats, led by Queens State Senator Michael Gianaris, had violated the state’s constitution in two ways – the process by which they drew the maps and the partisan bias with which the maps were drawn.
“The enactment of the congressional and senate maps by the legislature was procedurally unconstitutional, and the congressional map is also substantively unconstitutional as drawn with impermissible partisan purpose, leaving the state without constitutional district lines for use in the 2022 primary and general elections,” Justices Michael Garcia, Anthony Cannataro, Madeline Singas and Chief Judge Janet DiFiore wrote.
Though the judges ruled that the state’s Assembly district lines could remain as they were, they ordered a court-appointed special master to redraw the congressional and Senate lines, locking lawmakers out of the process completely. Jonathan Cervas, a postdoctoral fellow at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, will serve as the special master after he was appointed by McAllister when the lawsuit was initially filed.
New York’s primary elections, which were scheduled for June 28, will likely be pushed back until August, at the earliest. The court suggested that the state could hold its Assembly primaries in June and its Senate and congressional primaries two months later in a bifurcated process not unheard of in New York State. The justices were silent on the primary election for governor.
“We are confident that, in consultation with the Board of Elections, Supreme Court can swiftly develop a schedule to facilitate an August primary election, allowing time for the adoption of new constitutional maps, the dissemination of correct information to voters, the completion of the petitioning process, and compliance with federal voting laws,” the decision reads.
The decision stems from a case brought by a group of Republican voters – backed by Republican lawmakers – who alleged that state Democrats illegally took over map drawing duties from the New York Independent Redistricting Commission when it failed to submit a final map by its February deadline.
In its majority opinion, the court scolded state Democrats for seemingly bypassing the 2014 constitutional amendment that created the IRC. The amendment was, in part, designed to take partisan politics out of the once-in-a-decade redistricting processes.
In their ruling, which can’t be appealed, the justices said that elected officials violated gerrymandering laws by drawing the electoral lines in such a way that would prevent Republicans from being elected to a number of congressional and Senate districts for the next decade.
The now-tossed congressional maps eliminated an upstate district currently represented by Republican Rep. Claudia Tenney. Additionally, a number of Republican-leaning congressional districts were redrawn to include more Democratic voters.
The justices also said that lawmakers violated constitutional procedure when the IRC failed to submit a second set of maps after its first draft maps were rejected.
“In sum, there can be no question that the drafters of the 2014 constitutional amendments and the voters of this state intended compliance with the IRC process to be a constitutionally required precondition to the legislature’s enactment of redistricting legislation,” the justices wrote. “In urging this Court to adopt their view that the IRC may abandon its constitutional mandate with no impact on the ultimate result and by contending that the legislature may seize upon such inaction to bypass the IRC process and compose its own redistricting maps with impunity, the State respondents ask us to effectively nullify the 2014 amendments.”
“This we will not do,” the justices added.
Justices Shirley Troutman, Jenny Rivera and Rowan Wilson dissented.
“Todays decision was a complete precedent breaker,” said Jeffery Wice, an adjunct professor at New York Law School. “I was surprised because the Court of Appeals, in over 50 years, has usually deferred to legislature and where plans are violative. Courts usually give legislators the ability to rectify the situation subject to courts approval – Here they're bypassing the process”
Last week, a Rochester appellate court ruled that the lawmakers’ process for drawing the maps was legal but that its gerrymandered product was not, a decision the Court of Appeals partially upheld.
Some advocates and good government groups, who were initially disappointed by the way the redistricting process played out, were equally disappointed in the Court of Appeals’ decision Wednesday.
"The State Legislature ignored the will of New Yorkers, who in 2014 voted to create an Independent Redistricting Commission and ban gerrymandering,” said Betsy Gotbaum, the executive director of Citizens Union. “It is unfortunate that the Legislature overstepped its authority, thus relinquishing its power over the redistricting process and handing it over to the courts.”
The Central Queens Redistricting Coalition echoed a similar sentiment.
“Our coalition is made up of community organizers [and] this decision today is infuriating,” the group said. “Whereas we understand that these maps are problematic – to say the least – we are grieved at the amount of hours and money spent on this failed process that could have been used in communities.”
“Instead our leaders failed to create fair maps – ignoring organizers,” the group added.
But others see the decision as one that may permanently eliminate gerrymandering from the redistricting processes.
“This might be the end of partisan gerrymandering in New York,” said Brian Browne, an adjunct professor of political science at St. John’s University. “I think it's a solid decision, a decision that you're seeing taking place, not just in New York, but across the country and other states. If it means delaying the primary, I would say do it – I’d rather get it done right.”
The courts did not issue an opinion on what candidates running for offices whose districts are now thrown into the air should do about petitioning. The Board of Elections is currently in the process of certifying candidate petitions and finalizing the ballot, which will likely have to be redone.
It’s likely some districts see some major changes, according to Wice, who said New York’s 3rd Congressional District, which was redrawn to include parts of Queens, Nassau, Suffolk, the Bronx and Westchester Counties, may be at the top of the list.
“Candidates running for office in districts allegedly gerrymandered should be prepared to campaign in different districts that might be differently shaped,” Wice said. “I would not expect a new map to go from Suffolk all the way to the Connecticut line via the Long Island Sound.”
Questions also surround State Senate District 17, which was created for the first time by the lawmakers and covers parts of Long Island City, Woodside, Sunnyside and Maspeth. The district was created to match the area’s growing population.
“Now, the devil is going to really be in the details and what those details look like,” Browne said. “The logistics are now going to be hard to implement.”
