MADISON, Wis. – The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday decided to review a case ruled on last November that said the 2011 Republican re-drawing of State Assembly boundaries was an unconstitutional gerrymander, because of excessive partisanship.

Republicans maintain their methods were within the bounds of the Constitution.

There have been cases heard in the past regarding the method in which political boundaries are drawn, but Jay Heck, executive director of Common Cause in Wisconsin says this time it's different.

"In the past it's been thrown out because it's been in violation of voting rights or civil rights laws, but gerrymandering has always been considered somewhat of a partisan exercise,” he explains. “But in this case the U.S. Supreme Court may decide that this was too excessive."

Wisconsin Democrats argue that the 2011 Republican maps were drawn with the express purpose of disenfranchising Democratic voters.

Republicans disagree, and Republican legislative leaders have already hired two high profile law firms to represent them before the Supreme Court.

In May, the Supreme Court struck down two North Carolina congressional districts that the court said were drawn based too heavily on race.

Twelve Republican-dominated states have already lined up to support Wisconsin's Republicans in defending the 2011 maps. But Heck says both parties gerrymander to gain advantage, and the Wisconsin decision will have national implications.

"Democrats did the same thing in states like Rhode Island and Maryland, so this is not a Republican-Democratic issue,” he points out. “Of course, our neighbors to the south, Illinois, the Democrats have been doing this for years to the Republicans, so this could actually change the standard nationwide."

After the 2011 redistricting in Wisconsin, Republican candidates won 60 of the 99 seats in the State Assembly. However, Democratic candidates won a majority of the votes cast statewide for Assembly.

Heck says the U.S. Supreme Court could rule that this kind of partisan map drawing is constitutional.

"We tend to think that they're probably not going to do that, that they're probably going to opt for saying that excessive partisanship in drawing state legislative boundaries is unconstitutional, thereby upholding the Federal court decision last November," he states.

The Supreme Court will take up the Wisconsin case this fall.





get more stories like this via email

Women ages 50 and over cast a big chunk of ballots, with a big impact in American elections, and a new poll looked at what they want.

Findings in the AARP survey of likely voters done in February and March underscored why they are important, as well as what motivates them.

Stacy Larsen, communications director for AARP Oregon, said they make up more than a quarter of all registered voters, and are 15% more likely to vote than the population at large.

"This is a voting bloc that turns out in big numbers," Larsen emphasized. "The group of women 50+ are reliable and consistent voters. They cast nearly a third of all ballots in both the 2020 and 2018 elections."

When the survey was taken, nearly two-thirds of respondents said they would not make up their minds on who they were voting for until the weeks or days before Election Day.

The biggest concern for women ages 50 and older right now is the economy. Larsen pointed out nearly half ranked the rising cost of living as the most important issue facing the country.

"And close to three-quarters of them, 72% of this group, are concerned about their income keeping up with those rising costs," Larsen reported. "The majority say that the economy is not working well for them personally and that's a big jump from before the pandemic."

The second-biggest issue for the bloc of voters is the lack of unity in the country. About two-thirds say they want their elected official to work across the aisle to get things done, even if it involves compromise. Larsen stressed politicians should take note.

"Because women 50+ are likely to turn out in high numbers when other voters may be disengaging, it's critical for our elected officials and candidates for office to pay attention to this group," Larsen contended.

Examples of proposed policies and candidates tied to false claims of election fraud have spread to Minnesota, and a new national report found the movement is not slowing down ahead of this fall's vote.

A trio of voter-rights groups issued findings into how state legislatures are trying to subvert elections, including more leeway to reject results, requiring partisan or outside audits, and shifting power away from election administrators. Some ideas have been floated by Minnesota Republicans but are not likely to pass under the current balance of power.

Rachel Homer, counsel for the nonprofit group Protect Democracy, said simply proposing them poses a threat.

"This is about everyone in support of democracy," Homer asserted. "Both political parties really need to be standing against this movement toward autocracy."

Despite calls for unity, Republicans are seeing more candidates for statewide offices who either perpetuate the stolen-election narrative, or suggest current laws need restrictions they said would tighten election security.

The Minnesota GOP recently endorsed such a candidate running for Secretary of State, the office overseeing elections. The report said 175 such laws were introduced in the U.S. this year.

Homer argued false election-fraud claims, taking shape following Donald Trump's loss in the 2020 presidential vote, have ballooned to a five-alarm fire. She noted even if most bills do not pass, voters are still being exposed to theories soundly rejected by the courts.

"These bills are being proposed by a lot of legislators across a lot of states," Homer observed. "They clearly think there's an audience for it. "

The groups behind the report emphasized it is important to remember most administrators, staffs and volunteers are committed to free and fair elections.

Sylvia Albert, national voting and elections director for Common Cause, said outside the findings, potentially having some candidates espousing such views take office is concerning. If election results were to be rejected without a valid reason, she said it might be harder to seek recourse.

"So, there definitely is an ability to challenge in court, [but] the courts are leaning more and more toward stepping away and letting the political process run itself," Albert stressed. "What that does, is not protect the people who don't have power, which are normal Americans."

Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.

The pandemic appears to have increased the level of violence in U.S. cities, and a new study found local officials and mayors, especially those of color, face the brunt of it.

Heidi Gerbracht, co-founder of the Women Mayors Network and founder of Equity Agenda, said death threats, vandalized homes and outrage at public meetings have all been reported by local government officials.

"They're having to change their lives to continue serving because of these threats," Gerbracht pointed out. "There is absolutely concern about escalation. There's concern about their physical safety and their family's physical safety."

Gerbracht noted the increasing violence, as documented in research by Oklahoma State University, requires a response from local governments, which may include protective services from local police departments. Online safety and physical training for mayors is being offered this month by the Mayors Innovation Project.

In interviews with more than 3,000 mayors last fall, 70% said they knew someone who chose not to run for office because of the hostile nature of the work.

Rebekah Herrick, professor of social sciences and humanities at Oklahoma State University, who cowrote the report, said social media is driving the increased violence.

"94.5% of mayors reported what we call psychological violence," Herrick reported. "Things like social-media attacks, verbal attacks at a public meeting; 24.2% reported receiving at least one threat."

Gerbracht added the exposure of an elected leader's personal information also is becoming more common, a level of harassment causing local leaders to decide against seeking public office.

"We just have this expectation as the public that this isn't a problem for local elected officials," Gerbracht emphasized. "There is a real need for people to understand that this is not just politics. This is not just what you should expect to get into public service."