Supreme Court Again Weighs Voting Maps Warped by Politics.
'For the second time this term, the Supreme Court heard arguments on Wednesday about whether voting maps can be so distorted by politics that they violate the Constitution. But if the first arguments heartened opponents of extreme partisan gerrymandering, this hearing only served to confuse them.
The earlier case, from Wisconsin, was argued in October, and several justices seemed intrigued by the idea that the Constitution may place limits on extreme partisan gerrymandering, where the party in power draws voting districts to give itself an outsized advantage in future elections. A decision is expected by June.
The Supreme Court has never struck down a voting district as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. A ruling allowing such challenges could revolutionize American politics.
The court’s surprise announcement in December that it would hear a second partisan gerrymandering case, Benisek v. Lamone, No. 17-333, led to much speculation about what the move meant for the challengers in the Wisconsin case, Gill v. Whitford, No. 16-1161. But Wednesday’s argument did almost nothing to clear up the mystery of why the justices decided to hear a second case.
Several justices said the new case, from Maryland, was plagued by procedural and practical problems.
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor said there was little reason for the court to rule now because its decision would come too late to affect the 2018 elections. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said the challengers had waited too long to file suit.
If there was a hint about where the court was headed in the Wisconsin case, it came from Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who suggested that the court schedule a new round of arguments in both cases, along with one from North Carolina, in the term that will start in October.
Justice Breyer, who seems ready to allow constitutional challenges based on partisan gerrymandering, probably would not have made the suggestion had his views prevailed when the justices took their preliminary vote in the Wisconsin case in October.
The Maryland case is a challenge to a single congressional district, while the older one challenged a statewide map for the Wisconsin State Assembly. The new case was brought by Democratic voters, while the older one was brought by Republicans. And the new case relies solely on the First Amendment, while the older one was pursued largely on equal protection principles.'>>>
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/28/us/politics/supreme-court-elections-gerrymander.html?
Sounds like no 'decision' likely.