Politics

Court Ruling Spurs Backers’ Hopes for Redistricting Changes

Published

11 years ago

June 30, 2015

New interns run with a decision across the plaza of the Supreme Court in Washington, Monday June 29, 2015. On Monday, the court upheld Arizona congressional districts drawn by an independent commission and rejected a constitutional challenge from Republican lawmakers and upheld the use of a controversial drug in lethal injection executions Monday, as two dissenting justices said for the first time that they think it’s “highly likely” that the death penalty itself is unconstitutional. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

ALAN FRAM, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Groups hoping to squeeze partisan politics out of how states shape congressional districts are hailing a Supreme Court decision that lets independent commissions, not legislatures, draw those lines.

But Republicans say Monday’s 5-4 decision upholding Arizona’s independent redistricting commission will have little nationwide impact. And history shows that past efforts to persuade voters to change how states shape districts have had mixed results.

Proponents of shifting redistricting from state legislatures to independent bodies say they’ll rely in part on the same technique Arizona used: Initiatives, which let voters put questions on the ballot, usually after gathering signatures on petitions.

“The current system allows politicians to choose their voters, rather than allowing voters to choose their elected officials,” said Lloyd Leonard, advocacy director for the League of Women Voters, which filed a brief backing the commission.

From 1904 to 2001, there were 39 statewide ballot initiatives on how legislative boundaries are configured, and the voters have approved only 15, according data from the Initiative and Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California law school. Most addressed state legislative lines.

That underscores the difficulty of approving those changes and how infrequently such questions come before voters. Twenty-four states allow ballot initiatives, according to the institute.

While that opens the door for many states to consider redistricting commissions, “That door wasn’t exactly swinging wildly before this case came up,” said Thomas Mann, a congressional scholar at the liberal-leaning Brookings Institution who submitted a brief supporting commissions.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a new case in coming months on whether the drawing of state legislative lines by Arizona’s redistricting commission was constitutional.

With the GOP’s current House majority aided by its domination of congressional line-drawing in many states, some Republicans conceded that reducing that power could hurt them but would be hard for opponents to achieve.

“It’s a sweeping decision that lays the groundwork, but the work still has to be done” by advocates of independent commissions, said GOP strategist Sean Noble. “And whether they have the time, money or will has yet to be determined.”

Others doubted that commissions would actually remove partisanship from the once-a-decade process of shaping congressional districts.

The commissions “could be used to shield or really cover what is actually the same partisan politics,” said Michael T. Morley, attorney for the conservative Coolidge-Reagan Foundation, which wrote a brief opposing the Arizona commission.

Kathay Feng, national redistricting director for the liberal Common Cause, said efforts to use initiatives to alter how district boundaries are drawn are under way in Illinois, Michigan and Ohio. In three other states, supporters are working through the legislature: Indiana, Maryland and North Carolina, she said.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, “believes redistricting decisions are best made by the people’s representatives in state legislatures — not by some unelected, unaccountable board of bureaucrats,” said Boehner press secretary Olivia Hnat.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., backed the court decision and said Congress should set standards so state redistricting commissions “reflect the diversity of their states and communities.”

In Monday’s ruling, the justices rejected a challenge by Arizona’s Republican-led legislature to the state’s independent commission, which voters established by ballot initiative in 2000.

The legislators argued that the Constitution reserves the power to draw district lines to state legislatures, not a commission created by initiative. That argument was rejected by the court’s four liberal justices plus Anthony Kennedy, a frequent swing voter.

“The invention of the initiative was in full harmony with the Constitution’s conception of the people as the font of governmental power,” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote.

Led by Chief Justice John Roberts, the dissenters said the majority relied on “disconnected observations about direct democracy, a contorted interpretation of an irrelevant statute and naked appeals to public policy.”

The decision left the status quo intact for Arizona and 12 other states that have commissions with varying roles in drawing congressional lines.

Overall, Republicans have a 246-188 House majority, plus a vacancy in one GOP-leaning district.

Analysts attribute part of that advantage to Democrats’ concentration in dense urban areas. But it also reflects district lines Republicans drew after making major gains in 2010 state elections. In 2012, GOP House candidates got 1.4 million fewer votes than Democrats but won a 33-seat majority.

The GOP controls the governorship and legislature of 24 states, including Nebraska’s officially nonpartisan legislature. Seven states are run by Democrats and 19 are split, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Related Topics:congressional districts gerrymandering redistricting supreme court

Up Next

Maryland Moves to End Confederate Flag Plates

Don't Miss

Lawmakers Introduce Bill to Restore Voting Rights Act

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Bay Area

Oakland Mayor Pushes Charter Overhaul to Clarify Roles in City Government, Increase Accountability and Improve Service Delivery

Under the proposal, the mayor would serve as Oakland’s chief executive, overseeing city departments, implementing policy, proposing the annual budget, and managing day-to-day operations. The measure would also give the mayor veto power over legislation and the budget, though the City Council could override a veto with a two-thirds vote.

Published

1 week ago

May 17, 2026

Oakland Post

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee. File photo.

By Oakland Post Staff

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee is backing a sweeping proposal to restructure Oakland’s government, arguing the changes would make City Hall more accountable and improve the delivery of basic services like public safety, homelessness response, and infrastructure repairs.

The charter reform measure, introduced April 7 and co-sponsored by Oakland City Council President Kevin Jenkins, would ask voters in November to approve a “strong mayor, strong council” system designed to create clearer lines of authority inside city government.

The City Council, meanwhile, would maintain legislative authority by adopting ordinances, approving budgets, conducting oversight hearings, and confirming key mayoral appointments. The proposal would also create an Independent Budget and Legislative Analyst Office to provide nonpartisan fiscal and policy analysis for councilmembers.

“I’ve spent months listening to Oaklanders across every neighborhood about what they expect from their city government,” Lee said. “The Charter Reform Working Group’s engagement made clear that residents want a system where there are no questions about who is responsible for delivering results on public safety, homelessness, infrastructure, and basic services.”

Jenkins said the proposal would strengthen both executive leadership and council oversight.

“I’ve long believed Oakland works best when residents have clear lines of accountability and a government structure that aligns responsibility with results,” Jenkins said.

The proposal follows recommendations from the Mayor’s Charter Reform Working Group, co-facilitated by the League of Women Voters of Oakland and SPUR.

Over five months, the group conducted more than 60 interviews, held 14 public meetings across Oakland, and engaged more than 750 residents while reviewing governance models used in other cities.

“The process of engaging residents across Oakland surfaced the governance clarity Oakland needs,” said Sujata Srivastava of SPUR. “The Charter Reform Working Group has produced a thoughtful set of recommendations that if adopted could strengthen accountability and improve service delivery across city government.”

Polling cited by the mayor’s office suggests voters may be open to the changes. A February 2026 poll by the East Bay Polling Institute found 64% of voters support adopting a strong-mayor system. Separate polling conducted by the Oakland Chamber of Commerce and David Binder Research found support ranging from 61% to 63% among likely voters.

The measure is scheduled to be heard by the City Council Rules Committee on May 21. If approved by the council, it would appear on the November 2026 ballot, where Oakland voters would have the final say.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

The Ladies of Delta Sigma Theta Hold Day of Advocacy at the Capitol in Sacramento

A member of the “Divine Nine,” Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc., was founded on Jan. 13, 1913, at Howard University in Washington, D.C. The organization was established by 22 women who sought to shift the group’s focus from social activities to public service, academic excellence, and social activism.

Published

1 week ago

May 17, 2026

Oakland Post

Sen. Laura Richardson (D-San Pedro) presents a Senate resolution to the Delta Theta Sigma Sorority Farwest Region at the State Capitol on May 4. Photo courtesy of the Senate Rules Committee.

By Antonio Ray Harvey, California Black Media

On May 4, members of the Farwest Region of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc., convened at the California State Capitol for the organization’s 23rd annual Delta Days in Sacramento.

The two-day advocacy event brings together chapters from across California to engage directly in the legislative process, connect with lawmakers, and advocate for policies impacting Black communities.

Members of the sorority were honored on the Senate floor by Sen. Laura Richardson (D-San Pedro), who is also a member of Delta Sigma Theta.

Richardson welcomed the Farwest Region during the presentation of a Senate resolution recognizing outgoing Regional Director Kimberly Usher for her leadership and service.

“In addition to the Far West Region, we are led by a fearless leader, regional director Kimberly Usher. She has now served her full term of what’s allowed,” Richardson said. “We are going to be having our regional conference, but we wanted to give it to her here, officially recognizing her service.”

The resolution was co-authored by Richardson and fellow members of the California Legislative Black Caucus (CLBC) and Delta Sigma Theta, Sen. Akilah Weber Pierson (D-San Diego) and Assemblymember Rhodesia Ransom (D-Stockton).

Usher has served in the leadership role since 2022.

“We are founded on sisterhood that is deeply rooted in scholarship, service, and social action,” said Weber Pierson, a member of the Gamma Alpha chapter of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority.

“Today, we continue a legacy of empowering communities and upholding the high cultural, intellectual, and moral standards established by our founders over a century ago,” she added.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Rep. Kamlager-Dove Introduces Bill to Protect Women in Custody After Reports Detailing Miscarriages and Neglect

The Pregnant Women in Custody Act would expand safeguards beyond the federal prison system to include women detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Office of Refugee Resettlement. The proposal follows reports of pregnant women being shackled, denied medical care and suffering miscarriages while in immigration detention.

Published

1 week ago

May 17, 2026

Oakland Post

iStock

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media

Congresswoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA-37) on May 7, reintroduced updated legislation aimed at strengthening protections and healthcare standards for pregnant and postpartum women held in federal custody, including in immigration detention facilities.

The Pregnant Women in Custody Act would expand safeguards beyond the federal prison system to include women detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Office of Refugee Resettlement. The proposal follows reports of pregnant women being shackled, denied medical care and suffering miscarriages while in immigration detention.

The legislation builds on a bipartisan version previously passed by the House during the 117th Congress. The updated bill includes new standards for healthcare access, mental health and substance use treatment, high-risk pregnancy care, family unity protections and increased federal oversight.

“Proper pregnancy care is a human right, regardless of your immigration or incarceration status,” Kamlager-Dove said in a statement. “It’s unacceptable that there are virtually no legal safeguards for pregnant women in federal custody.”

The bill would also limit the use of restraints and restrictive housing for pregnant women, improve data collection on maternal health in custody and require additional staff training and enforcement measures.

Supporters of the measure said the legislation is intended to address long-standing concerns about maternal healthcare and safety in detention settings, particularly for Black women and low-income women who are disproportionately impacted by incarceration and health disparities.

“Pregnant women in custody should never be subjected to dangerous and inhumane treatment that threatens their health, dignity, or the well-being of their babies,” said Patrice Willoughby, chief of policy and legislative affairs for the NAACP and a longtime public policy and government affairs strategist, in a statement.

A 2021 report estimated there are about 58,000 admissions of pregnant women into U.S. jails and prisons each year. Kamlager’s statement also cited a recent investigation by NBC News and Bloomberg Law that identified allegations of severe mistreatment or medical neglect involving at least 54 pregnant women or families in county jails between 2017 and 2024.

Federal policy under the Department of Homeland Security restricts the detention of pregnant, postpartum and nursing immigrants except in extreme cases. However, the agency reported that ICE deported 363 pregnant, postpartum or nursing women between January 2025 and February 2026, including 16 recorded miscarriages during that period.

The bill is cosponsored by several House Democrats and backed by organizations including the NAACP and the Vera Institute of Justice.