Kavanaugh looks like justice to watch Gerrymandering supporters: NPR

The Supreme Court seemed very divided on the question of whether there was a limit to what courts can impose on redistricting political parties, also called gerrymandering.

"I've considered some of your arguments in memoirs and in amicus briefs to be that extreme-partisan gerrymandering is a real problem for our democracy," Kavanaugh told lawyers advocating for # 39; s case. "I will not challenge it."

On Tuesday, the court considered contests of congressional district maps in North Carolina, drawn by Republicans, and Maryland, by Democrats.

The issue of delineating political boundaries has become increasingly important for both parties over the past decade.

After the mid-term sessions of 2010, Republicans used their control of many state legislatures to draw favorable congressional cards for the GOP. An analysis done this month by the Associated Press revealed that the Republicans had most likely gained about 16 more seats in the House last fall than they would have expected in the fall. because of their share of the vote resulting from these lines. Yet the Democrats have taken control of the House.

One of the most prominent House Democrats bills would require states to use independent redistricting commissions for congressional districts.

Kavanaugh, a Republican who lives in Maryland, was active in interrogations and seemed to show some openness to the idea that drawing the boundaries of a district for a partisan advantage is a real problem.

"Is proportional representation not a legally manageable standard?" Kavanaugh has asked Paul Clement, the prominent Conservative advocate who defends Republican carving in North Carolina.

"Well, that is – it's a difficult standard," replied Clement. "That would require answering a few questions about where it came from – what elections will you get the basics, but it could be manageable."

Kavanaugh's next question: "Why can not the Equal Protection Clause be interpreted as requiring something that looks like proportional representation?"

Clement noted that the drafters of the Constitution gave the state legislatures the power to draw districts.

One may wonder if Kavanaugh is really a pivotal vote. He replaced retired Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was really a pivotal vote on the issue of gerrymandering supporters.

Kavanaugh could have been the devil's advocate, as judges are sometimes inclined to do; he may simply not want to close the door immediately, in his first appearance in court, on an issue that he seems to recognize as a real problem; or he is really interested in finding limits to partisan gerrymandering.

Kavanaugh also asked in-depth questions to lawyers arguing against how the state drew the districts. Lawyer Emmet Bondurant pleaded against North Carolina stating: "This case concerns the most extreme supporter of the gerrymander to rig the congressional elections presented to this court since the case" one person / one vote ".

Bondurant, 82, argued that the Supreme Court had established that congressional districts had to contain the same number of people in 1964 – at the age of 26.

A federal court canceled the map of North Carolina in 2011 because it had determined that the map had been gerrymander based on the breed, which is not allowed. Thus, the GOP government legislature approved about the same card, said the members this time, on the basis of their political affiliation, so as not to be perceived as racially motivated.

Bondurant argued that the defense of the North Carolina legislature is, well, indefensible.

"They adopt the following position: whatever the predominant intention," said Mr Bondurant, "as extreme as the effects are, there is absolutely no constitutional limitation for the partisan gerrymander".

In other words, the map of the North Carolina legislature is so openly – and extremely – politically, according to Bondurant, that state republicans are essentially saying that it does not exist there. has no limits to partisanship when it is a question of a new distribution.

Kavanaugh has seized the use of the extreme word by Bondurant – and has relied on what he sees as a potential limit.

"When you use the word," Kavanaugh said, "when you use the word" extreme ", it implies a baseline." Extreme versus what? "

"In this case, it is extreme in relation to any statistical application of neutral redistribution principles in the context of the political geography of North Carolina," Bondurant replied.

He cited random cards drawn by Jowei Chen, a political science professor and voter survey expert at the University of Michigan, and pointed out that the North Carolina gerrymander was "not a coincidence. You can only do this by making bias the main motivation. "

Judges, however, continued to press Bondurant for a generally applicable standard. Conservative Judge Neil Gorsuch also discussed the possibility of holding referendums in independent commissions, which some states have approved.

Bondurant noted, however, that "the vast majority of states in eastern Mississippi, including North Carolina, do not have a citizen initiative". And state legislatures must ratify these voting initiatives, so "this is not an effective cure," he noted.

Republican Governor Larry Hogan, for example, has tried four times to come up with such an initiative in Maryland, where Democrats have controlled how boundaries are drawn.

Bondurant argued for the use of statistical models and the resulting mapping to find a line for correct maps.

Judge Sonia Sotomayor said: "[T]The reality is that with all statistical models, we spend our life on this basis, insurance is paid on statistical models, health insurance premiums are based on statistical models. "

Even nuclear power plants, she noted, are based on statistical models.

Judge Stephen Breyer, however, touched on a key issue, namely, how the judges would probably try to make a decision.

"[T]The problem I think your side all morning must be addressed, said Breyer, comes from this side of the bench. Some observers of earlier cases are very concerned that, unless you have a very clear standard, you are going to hand a lot, a lot of US elections to the judges. "

And if there is one thing that Supreme Court justices want to do, it's stay out of politics.

Clement, understanding this, express it thus to the judges: "[O]As soon as you enter the political grove, you do not go out and you will tarnish the image of this court for the other cases where it needs this reputation for independence so that people can understand the difference fundamental between judging and any other policy. "