Michigan’s political districts illegally gerrymandered, court rules

Michigan voters last year approved a Voters Not Politicians referendum to allow a voter-elected panel to draw political districts rather than politicians.

Oct. 21, 2019: U.S. high court kills Michigan gerrymandering case ordering new districts
June 2019: What the U.S. Supreme Court gerrymandering ruling means for Michigan
June 2019: Reaction in Michigan to U.S. Supreme Court gerrymandering decision
May 24, 2019: U.S. Supreme Court halts order requiring Michigan to redraw political lines
Update: Michigan Republicans appeal gerrymandering ruling. What you need to know.​
Update: To fix maps, Michigan Republicans must please Whitmer and three irked judges

DETROIT –  A three-judge federal panel on Thursday ruled that Michigan Republicans redistricting in 2011 was so partisan that it constituted an illegal gerrymander, and has ordered special elections in nearly three dozen districts in 2020.

“Today, this Court joins the growing chorus of federal courts that have, in recent years, held that partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional,” according to a ruling written by U.S. District Judge Eric Clay, an appointee of Democratic President Bill Clinton.

The court found that Republicans' methods for redrawing Michigan’s political districts violated Democratic voters' First and 14th "Amendment rights because it deliberately dilutes the power of their votes by placing them in districts that were intentionally drawn to ensure a particular partisan outcome in each district.”

Related: Read the court order

The lawsuit, brought by The League of Women Voters and several Democratic voters in Michigan, targeted 34 state House, Senate and U.S. congressional districts that it claimed were drawn to favor Republicans and minimize the election of Democrats.

The court found that all of those districts in Michigan were illegally gerrymandered and ordered Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson to hold special elections in 2020 with redrawn districts. 

The Michigan Legislature has until Aug. 1 to redraw the districts, but a special master could be appointed to oversee the process if lawmakers fail to act, the judges ruled.

 

Affected are at least nine congressional districts, 10 state Senate districts and 15 House seats, but several other adjacent ones could also have to be redrawn because of a ripple effect caused by redrawing lines.

Senate Majortity Leader Mike Shirkey, R-Clarklake, indicated Republicans will appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court, which is weighing separate gerrymandering cases in North Carolina and Maryland. A decision on those cases is likely in June and could preempt the Michigan ruling.

"We'll know in June what's really going on," Sen. Pete Lucido, R-Shelby Township, told Bridge on Thursday. 

His district is among those targeted in the suit and would have to be redrawn if the ruling stands. Like other senators, he was elected to a four-year term in November. The ruling could theoretically cut those terms in half. The duration of those terms -- and whether those half terms would count toward term limits -- is one of the big uncertainties following the bombshell ruling.

August 2019: Voters Not Politicians asks to intervene in Michigan GOP redistricting suit

"Right now, it’s a lot of he said-she said," Lucido said. "But at the end of the day, when the Democrats were in charge, they drew the lines. We didn’t file lawsuits. But now that Republicans are in charge, everything is unfair."

The judges, however, specifically rejected such a characterization, saying their ruling did "not rely on isolated off-hand comments" but was based instead on extensive evidence from statistical experts, testimony from legislative mapdrawers, Republican legislators and staffers, political operatives and a "wide-range of documentary evidence," most notably a cache of emails (often written on private email accounts) among Republican lawmakers and insiders showing an undisguised effort to favor the GOP incumbents and harm Democrats in drawing district lines in 2011 "with discriminatory  intent."

The judges ordered special elections for the Senate to coincide with reguarly scheduled elections, so they "would not impose a heavy burden on Michigan’s normal electoral process."

"While senators may be disappointed that their four-year terms will be reduced to two years, the sentiment of the legislators elected under an unconstitutional apportionment plan does not outweigh the constitutional rights of millions of Michiganders to elect their senators under constitutional maps," the ruling read.

State Republican Party Chairwoman Laura Cox said the party “will support an appeal to uphold the will of Michigan voters.”

'Dem garbage'

The ruling follows a trial in U.S. District Court in Detroit in February and the discovery of reams of emails from 2011 showing that Republicans drew districts in secret and bragged about crafting them to strengthen their advantage.

The districts have consistently allowed Republicans to maintain strong majorities in Lansing, even though they typically receive roughly 50 percent or less of total votes across the state. 

During the trial, George Washington University political scientist Christopher Warshaw testified the Michigan Senate maps “have more pro-Republican bias than 99.7 percent of all state Legislature maps across the country in the last 45 years.”

The judges agreed, writing the 2011 maps are a “political gerrymander of historical proportions."

"The (districts) ... represented the culmination of a calculated initiative by Michigan’s Republican legislators and map-makers, in the 2011 redistricting cycle, to deliberately draw Michigan’s legislative districts to maximize Republican advantage and, consequently, disadvantage Democratic voters, Democratic candidates, and the Democratic Party," the judges wrote. "The partisan advantage that Michigan lawmakers achieved through the Enacted (redistricting) Plan persists to this day."
 
Clay was joined in the ruling by another Clinton appointee, Denise Page Hood, and Judge Gordon Quist, who was appointed by Republican President George H.W. Bush.
 
Eric Lupher, president of the nonpartisan Citizens Research Council that has studied gerrymandering, said the evidence in the trial clearly showed Republicans worked to create districts to their advantage. Among others, emails from GOP staffers bragged about trying to "cram Dem garbage" in southeast Michigan districts and tweak borders to satisfy the “the obvious objective — putting dems in a dem district and reps in a gop district" and "increase the black population in the black districts."

"They had a smoking gun [with the emails]," Lupher told Bridge.

"It wasn’t whether the districts in Michigan were gerrymandered, but whether it was a judicable case."

Michigan's congressional delegation is split 7-7 following the 2018 election, while Republicans have a 22-16 majority in the Senate and 58-52 majority in the House.

Special elections would appear to benefit Democrats, who often receive as many or more votes as Republicans in statewide contests. But the 2020 elections would coincide with a presidential election, and Lupher said he's unsure if Democrats could gain another seat in Congress even with new maps.

Matt Grossman, director of the Institute for Public Policy and Social Research at Michigan State University. said there are no guarantees for Democrats.

“Most people are expecting a very high turnout in 2020, on both sides,” he said. “Compared to the electorate that senators usually face, this would be a much larger electorate.”
 
Jeff Timmer, a GOP consultant who helped draw the maps and testified for Republicans in the case, tweeted that drawing new maps would be problematic.
 
"New maps would be drawn using 2010 Census data," Timmer tweeted. "Hundreds of thousands of people dying, born, immigrating, and emigrating in past 9 years. Any resulting districts would have bogus populations and profoundly violate one man one vote."
 
Republicans had sought for months to dismiss and delay the lawsuit, brought on behalf of the League of Women Voters by former Michigan Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer. The GOP had argued that the districts were not only drawn to exacting legal standards, but by now ordering them redrawn was a waste of time and money. 
 
The districts are set to be redrawn anyway following the 2020 Census after Michigan voters last year approved a referendum that allows a citizen panel to create the boundaries, rather than politicians. Thursday's ruling, if upheld, would move up that timeline to include 2020 elections. 

The Thursday ruling is far more favorable to Democrats than a settlement earlier this year by new Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and the League of Women Voters, which would have redrawn only 11 House districts.

The court rejected that settlement, however, ruling that Benson didn’t have the power to craft such a deal.

She inherited the case from her Republican predecessor at the Secretary of State, Ruth Johnson, who is now a state senator representing northern Oakland County and whose district will have to be redrawn.

Benson issued a statement Thursday saying, “I’m committed to working with the Legislature, citizens and the court to ensure the new districts comply with our U.S. Constitution.”

Reactions along party lines 

Senate Minority Leader Jim Ananich, D-Flint, issued a statement saying "we expect there to be a lot of legal process ahead of us."

House Minority Leader Christine Greig, D-Farmington Hills, said “Michiganders have known for years that our current legislative districts silenced their voices at the ballot box."

"The court’s opinion is damning," she said.

The League of Women Voters issued a brief statement saying it was pleased by the ruling and looking forward to "fair districts."

Nancy Wang, executive director of Voters Not Politicians that spearheaded a referendum for citizen-drawn districts, issued a statement saying she agrees "that existing maps were drawn with political interests in mind, rather than accurately representing Michigan voters."

"We hope the legislature will draw this set of interim maps to represent voters, not politicians, just like 61% of Michigan voters supported in the last election," she said.

Katie Fahey, whose Facebook post sparked the Voters Not Politicians movement, told Bridge on Thursday that the ruling shows "that people aren't meant to be political pawns."

"We showed now on the ground and in the courts in Michigan that we can do something to address these systemic issues that keep us from having more representation," said Fahey, who is now executive director of The People, a national organization that seeks to organize local advocacy groups in states to push public policy that improves democracy.

Like what you’re reading in Bridge? Please consider a donation to support our work!

We are a nonprofit Michigan news site focused on issues that impact all citizens. In an era of click bait and biased news, we focus on taking the time to learn both sides of a story before we post it. Bridge stories are always free, but our work costs money. If our journalism helps you understand and love Michigan more, please consider supporting our work. It takes just a moment to donate here.

Pay with VISA Pay with MasterCard Pay with American Express Donate now

Comment Form

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Comments

Edythe
Thu, 04/25/2019 - 4:36pm

Cheating your way in to force your will on the people, shameful.

Mary
Thu, 04/25/2019 - 9:45pm

It's the RepubliCon way.

Anonymous
Fri, 04/26/2019 - 7:13am

""Right now, it’s a lot of he said-she said," Lucido said. "But at the end of the day, when the Democrats were in charge, they drew the lines. We didn’t file lawsuits. But now that Republicans are in charge, everything is unfair.""

BINGO!!!

THAT is why the democrats are pushing for this (and other ideas like eliminating the Electoral College, no citizenship question on the Census forms, expanding "entitlements", open borders, etc.).

When your ideology doesn't resonate with the voters and doesn't promote nor expand their agenda, throw a temper tantrum and see what sticks.

Onwards to SCOTUS.

Bernadette
Fri, 04/26/2019 - 10:20am

Childish. Of course Mr. Lucido would say that. Have you educated yourself on this issue? All you have to do is look at the facts of the last ten years. This state has gone so far down the rabbit hole of republicanism, and is so out of balance it is pathetic.

Al Churchill
Mon, 04/29/2019 - 2:40am

Your statement that, when the Democrats gerrymandered, during an earlier period, the Republicans didn't object, leaves one not knowing how to respond. It is probable that that the possibility of each citizens' vote having equal weight just didn't enter their consciousness. Certainly, over the last ten years, they, cynically and deliberately, demonstrated that to be the case. Additionally, many, many, many times over, I have heard Republican conservatives refer to themselves as "constitutional conservatives". Not trying to be too hard on the Republicans, perhaps the dog ate their homework on the days that constitutional text and history were discussed. That being the case, maybe that's why they forgot about the constitution and election law during the last ten years. or maybe they feel that their "ideology doesn't resonate with the voters". Perhaps they feel the need for their own self-interest to prevail over the common good and justifies extreme aggression against those who have divergent beliefs. The latter sentence probably explains the situation.
Let me digress.
While the great majority of gerrymandering around the country, recently has been done by "constitutional conservative" Republicans, in Maryland, the Democrats have gerrymandered the state in the same manner as Michigan Republicans have gerrymandered this state.
In my opinion, the only difference is the self-righteous, pious and hypocritical positioning of Republicans as the right kind of constitutional adherent, patriot, etc., when in fact, they , like the gerrymander issue demonstrates, use those terms to facilitate a partisan agenda. When partisan utility is required, high minded behavior is set aside.
It doesn't matter if it is the Republicans or Democrats violating the virtue of democratic principles. When either party involves itself in this kind of anti-democratic activity, it is wrong.
And that's the point.
The issue, the weight of every citizens vote being equal to that of every other voter, has been a part of the American experience , at least since the Constitutional Convention. Early in that dialogue the question who can vote was present. If Hamilton once, over dinner with Jefferson, said that the people, "... are a beast', the majority at the Convention thought the common folk too often ruled by emotion and easily led by a demagogue. The Constitution, in its 1787 state disallowed citizens from voting for a federal senator. Unchanged until a Constitutional Amendment did so around, roughly, the Progressive period of our history, there have been restrictions that determined who could vote, Our society has evolved to where all citizens are able to vote and all votes have equal weight.
The vote is central to American freedom. Don't allow self- interested, cynical, anti-democratic politicians of any stripe deprive us of what is our democratic birthright.
Doing so requires that we put aside any personal, especially, political partisan considerations. It requires that organizations like the League of Women Voters and Voters- Not Politicians, those organizations that put the issue on the ballot, are deeply involved as overseers in the way that Michigan's map is redrawn. It means that , all of us, Democrats and Republicans alike, need to remember the responsibilities of citizenship.
As for Anonymous, I hope he gets it. Relative to the citizenship question being on the 2020 Census, there is no need ask if one is a citizen. That information is already available in other Census Department data. It has been determined that putting a citizenship question in the Census will create more Republican politicians in the government. The question has not been asked since 1950. More scheming.

LLA
Fri, 04/26/2019 - 8:31am

YUP! This is why MI voters overwhelmingly voted #YesOn2 in November. It is now time for MI republicans to get to work on rectifying their flagrant disregard for MI voters. Clock is tickin'!

MAGA
Fri, 04/26/2019 - 8:44am

The DemonRatz know 1,000 ways to cheat and are using all of them. Friends don't let friends vote for DemonRatz.

Bernadette
Fri, 04/26/2019 - 10:22am

Childish. Name calling, stomping your feet, and blaming everyone else when the truth comes out sounds alot like 45. Grow up.

zooman
Mon, 04/29/2019 - 8:05pm

Have you read the opinion, MAGA?? If you did so wearing the hat of a true patriot, you would be absolutely appalled by how brazen and outrageous the Republicans were in drawing the lines. Michigan voters recognized that there was a need for change when they overwhelmingly approved Proposal 2 (it got more votes than marijuana).

Arjay
Fri, 04/26/2019 - 9:08am

That's right. Time to have a re-vote to see if those newly elected Democrats in "Republican districts" are really what the people wanted. Whoops, the law of unintended consequences rears its ugly head again.

Geoffrey Owen
Fri, 04/26/2019 - 1:49pm

That is a bit of good news. Redraw the districts and hold new elections. until then watch the R party flood the legislature with more garbage aimed at attacking the people of Michigan. In 2021 we redraw the districts again, this time not along either party preferrence. The D party has had the number in the last 3 elections and the majority continues to be R.

Henry
Tue, 04/30/2019 - 9:50pm

While the Republicans took an analytic approach to gerrymandering Congressional districts to fill seats with Republicans, Democrats succeeded with their own gerrymandering strategy that filled seats with under-served minorities. These complementary goals served to produce the current Congressional districts. The current districts have the advantage that Michigan is a swing state where candidates invest capital to win voters. It would be unfortunate if redistricting returned us to a time when Michigan was not a national priority.