Ohio Supreme Court strikes down state legislative maps
The Ohio Supreme Court struck down Gop-drawn state House and Senate district maps as unconstitutional gerrymandering in a 4-3 decision
Wednesday, sending the maps back to the drawing board.
The Ohio Redistricting Commission did not attempt to follow a section of the Ohio Constitution that required an effort to match the statewide voting preferences of voters, which it determined was 54% for Republican candidates and 46% for Democratic candidates over the past decade, according to the court's opinion, written by Justice Melody Stewart.
“The commission is required to attempt to draw a plan in which the statewide proportion of Republican-leaning districts to Democratic-leaning districts
closely corresponds to those percentages,” Stewart wrote. “Section 6 speaks not of desire but of direction: the commission shall attempt to achieve the standards of that section."
That section was added in a 2015 constitutional amendment overwhelmingly approved by voters.
"We reject the notion that Ohio voters rallied so strongly behind an antigerrymandering amendment to the Ohio Constitution yet believed at the time that the amendment was toothless," Stewart wrote.
The new plan must be adopted within 10 days, and the Ohio Supreme Court retains jurisdiction for review of the new plan, according to a court filing.
Chief Justice Maureen O'connor was the key vote, breaking with her party to rule against the maps. O'connor, a Republican, joined the court's three Democratic justices and the three GOP justices dissented.
O'connor, who has served in statewide office for 24 years, suggested an alternative to the commission, which she called
out for its partisanship.
“Having now seen firsthand that the current Ohio Redistricting Commission – comprised of statewide elected officials and partisan legislators – is seemingly unwilling to put aside partisan concerns as directed by the people's vote, Ohioans may opt to pursue further constitutional amendment to replace the current commission with a truly independent, nonpartisan commission that more effectively distances the redistricting process from partisan politics,”
O'connor wrote in a concurring opinion.
Now, the seven-member commission faces a time crunch to craft new maps because Feb. 2 is the current deadline to file paperwork to run for the Ohio Legislature. State lawmakers could change that filing date without moving the May 3 primary.
Advocates of fair maps hailed the decision as a resounding victory for Ohio voters who overwhelmingly approved changes to the state constitution to limit partisan
line-drawing.
Justice Sharon Kennedy, a Republican, wrote in a dissenting opinion that the court did not have the constitutional authority to send the maps back.
She and Justice Pat Dewine, who signed on to her dissent, argued that the section in Ohio's constitution that says no plan "shall be drawn primarily to favor or disfavor a political party" doesn't have the same enforcement mechanisms as other sections.
"The majority today, though, finds the constitutionally
imposed limits unduly constraining, so it chooses to disregard them," Kennedy wrote.
How Ohio’s maps were drawn
On Sept. 16, Republicans on the Ohio Redistricting Commission approved maps that would allow the GOP to retain its veto-proof majority in the state Legislature over the objections of the commission's two Democrats.
According to Senate President Matt Huffman, R-lima, the maps could give Republicans a 62-37 advantage in the House and 23-10 advantage in the Senate.
Republicans justified their maps by saying voters preferred GOP candidates between 54% and 81% of the time. Those figures are the average percentage of votes GOP candidates received in recent statewide elections and the percent of statewide races won by Republicans over the past decade, respectively.
Three lawsuits were filed against the maps at the Ohio Supreme Court, saying GOP mapmakers disregarded a section of voter-approved changes to the Ohio Constitution that required them to attempt to match voters' political preferences. They argued that the maps gave Republicans an unfair and unearned advantage.
During oral arguments, attorneys for a slew of voting rights groups and Democratic activists argued that GOP mapmakers drew lines that disproportionately favored Republican candidates – in violation of the Ohio Constitution.
But Phil Strach, the Republican attorney representing mapmakers, argued that those drawing the lines did not need to create maps that matched statewide voting preferences, as long as they followed other rules to prevent splitting communities.
In the end, the Ohio Supreme Court sided with those who found flaws in the maps.
The Ohio Supreme Court is also reviewing the Gop-drawn congressional map, which was challenged by two lawsuits. A ruling on that map is still pending.
Earlier in the day, U.S. District Court Judge John Adams placed a federal case challenging state and congressional maps on hold for 60 days while the Ohio Supreme Court reviewed several pending lawsuits.
Jessie Balmert is a reporter for the USA TODAY Network Ohio Bureau, which serves the Akron Beacon Journal, Cincinnati Enquirer, Columbus Dispatch and 18 other affiliated news organizations across Ohio.