How New York’s gerrymander fight endangers GOP – Latest News
Redistricting battles in Texas and California grabbed national consideration for months — however all of the whereas, an attempt to re-gerrymander New York’s congressional map has been quietly underway in a Manhattan courtroom.
On Wednesday, appearing State Supreme Court Justice Jeffrey Pearlman invalidated New York’s eleventh Congressional District and ordered new strains drawn within the subsequent two weeks, giving the case’s Democratic plaintiffs precisely what they need.
Contrary to the plaintiffs’ arguments, this isn’t about defending minority voting rights.
It’s about discovering any pretext to flip the final Republican-held House seat in New York City.
And it’s all being orchestrated by Marc Elias, the Democratic “superlawyer” whose firm seeks to win within the courtroom what his celebration can’t win on the poll box.
The district covers all of Staten Island and the Brooklyn neighborhoods instantly throughout the Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge: Fort Hamilton, Bath Beach, Bensonhurst, Dyker Heights and half of Bay Ridge.
It’s the identical primary map that’s existed for 5 a long time, but Elias’ lawsuit claims this district improperly dilutes black and Latino voting energy.
His argument is galling for a lot of causes, together with that the present map was created by Elias’ own Democratic allies in Albany in 2024.
Democrats drew these strains, then Democrats sued to redraw them — as a result of they didn’t just like the election outcomes.
In addition, Judge Pearlman’s choice creates a new legal commonplace so broad as to go away just about any House district open to problem.
He discovered proof of “racially polarized voting” — that black and Latino voters in NY-11 are likely to assist the identical candidates, whereas white voters often assist completely different ones — and famous that minority-preferred candidates received solely 5 of the 20 most up-to-date elections.
But do the maths: Black and Latino voters make up roughly 30% of the district, and their most popular candidates received 25% of elections.
That’s proportional.
The decide, nonetheless, held that “vote dilution claims do not turn on whether minority-preferred candidates win elections at a rate that matches” their relative population in a district.
Under this logic, any district the place minority-preferred candidates lose more than they win may very well be unconstitutional.
That’s absurd, and an invitation for infinite litigation.
The choice additionally alleges a historical past of racial discrimination on Staten Island, together with redlining and segregation. These are severe historic wrongs.
But it by no means explains how the present district strains are accountable for these previous situations — or how redrawing the district would repair something.
Then there’s the elephant within the room: the district’s present three-term member of Congress.
That can be Republican Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, a Latina whose mom is an immigrant from Cuba.
The choice acknowledges Malliotakis was “the first elected official of Latin American descent elected in Staten Island” — however dismisses this, explaining that electing an precise minority candidate is completely different from electing a minority-preferred candidate.
A Latina congresswoman represents the district, but the court docket finds the district strains dilute Latino voting energy as a result of she’s the incorrect type of Latina — a Latina Republican.
Make no mistake, this lawsuit was by no means about empowering minority voters.
Get opinions and commentary from our columnists
Subscribe to our each day Post Opinion e-newsletter!
Thanks for signing up!
It’s purely about electing more Democrats.
Judge Pearlman’s treatment makes the partisan sport apparent: The choice sends the case to the Independent Redistricting Commission with a Feb. 6 deadline — two weeks away, with candidate petitioning for November’s midterms beginning Feb. 24.
Rep. Nicole Malliotakis is a Latina congresswoman who represents the New York district, but the court docket finds its strains dilute Latino voting energy as a result of she’s the incorrect type of Latina — a Republican. AP
The IRC, with its equal quantity of Republican and Democratic members, has repeatedly deadlocked. It received’t meet this inconceivable deadline.
When it fails, the Democrat-dominated state Legislature will draw the strains itself.
This is the third time New York will redraw its congressional map in three election cycles.
The 2022 “Hochulmander” was so partisan that courts struck it down; a court-appointed professional drew maps for that 12 months’s congressional elections.
Democrats satisfied the Court of Appeals to let the Legislature redraw the maps in 2024, and Republicans misplaced three seats that November.
But three seats clearly wasn’t enough.
Now the Democrats need New York City’s solely GOP congressional seat, too.
By an overwhelming margin, New York voters amended the state Constitution in 2014 to stop this manipulation of the redistricting course of.
They needed to finish the gerrymandering insanity and the fixed litigation by partisan legal professionals searching for to sport the system.
As Wednesday’s choice works its manner by way of the appeals course of, this fight is now greater than only one House seat.
It’s about whether or not New York’s constitutional safeguards in opposition to gerrymandering imply something in any respect — or whether or not they are often exploited by partisans every time election outcomes don’t go their manner.
Joseph T. Burns is a companion within the law firm Holtzman Vogel and a New York State-based election lawyer.
