The student news site of Marquette University

Marquette Wire

The student news site of Marquette University

Marquette Wire

The student news site of Marquette University

Marquette Wire

Wis. redistricting controversy reaches federal courts

In a new development in the Wisconsin redistricting controversy that began last summer, federal judges are now deliberating over whether legislation passed to redraw Wisconsin’s districts is unconstitutional.

After a lawsuit was brought against the legislation in July, Democrats and Republicans have been battling over the new districts, which Democrats claim favor Republican candidates. This could change which party is in control of the state legislature for the next 10 years, after which new districts will be drawn again.

“The new districts reduced the ability of voters to have a meaningful opportunity to elect the candidates of their choice,” said Dane Varese, an outreach and development director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign. “Safe seats were created so that only 25 of 132 districts were competitive, as compared to 80 competitive districts in a map submitted by the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign.”

Many claim the new districts are biased in favor of Republicans. There is also anger from some groups about whether the new districts disenfranchise certain ethnic groups.

“Several lawsuits have been filed,” Varese said. “The most significant appears to be an action in federal court which challenges the state legislative districts on the basis of partisan and racial gerrymandering.”

Redistricting is usually biased, said Janet Boles, a Marquette professor emerita of political science.

“The redistricting of electoral districts has always been subject, first, to maximizing partisan advantage and, second, to incumbent protection if there is a clear majority party in the legislative bodies, as was the case in Wisconsin in 2011,” Boles said. “It is safe to say that incumbent Democrats were not protected by Republican legislators and, if the plan remains the same, Republicans will pick up seats in 2012.”

Boles added that this kind of bias is generally accepted by the courts, but redistricting to disenfranchise minorities is not.

“The Supreme Court has allowed both types of bias but, since the Voting Rights Acts, has acted against dilution of minority votes,” she said.

The state senate passed the new Republican-drawn map, which created new political boundary lines for all 132 members of the state legislature, in July. Controversy erupted over the vote because Democrats claimed it was done behind closed doors and without Democrats voting. The bill passed the state assembly soon after it passed the senate.

Earlier this year, three federal judges mandated that Republican lawmakers turn over all documents related to the legislation to be reviewed. Although judges gave Wisconsin lawmakers another chance to compromise on the district lines, they did not change the maps.

Lawyers deliberating in the federal trial have now dropped two of the charges, leaving questions about whether the new maps disenfranchised many of Milwaukee’s Hispanic voters and whether some voters were moved needlessly in and out of certain districts.

Milwaukee advocacy group Voces de la Frontera, which advocates for immigrant rights, has spoken out and investigated the circumstances under which the maps were drawn.

Peter Earle, Voces de la Frontera’s lead attorney, said in a statement that the redistricting was counterproductive to good governmental practices.

“The only appropriate response to these serious breaches of the public trust is to throw the maps out and begin the process again in a legal and open manner,” Earle said.

Story continues below advertisement
Leave a Comment

Comments (0)

All Marquette Wire Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *