PoliticsSupreme Court

Actions

Gerrymandering Is Absolutely Unfair, But Should SCOTUS Get Involved?

The court typically wants nothing to do with cases that could paint it as a political actor ... and for good reason.
Posted at 1:34 PM, Jun 13, 2018
and last updated 2018-06-13 13:34:23-04

It's the practice of drawing voting districts that gives one person's vote more weight than another's. And while that sounds blatantly unfair, gerrymandering is as old as the republic itself   — it was used in the the very first congressional elections for a seat in Virginia.

The Supreme Court heard two cases in the past year — Gill v. Whitford out of Wisconsin and Benisek v. Lamone out of Maryland — that could create a landmark standard for partisan gerrymandering.

But is intervening in partisan districting a move that could paint the nation's highest court as a political actor?

In Newsy's ongoing series "Ask the Experts," Professor Jay Dow of the Kinder Institute on Constitutional Democracy says that's a possible side effect that could make the cure worse than the disease.