Partisan gerrymandering is the configuring of election districts to advantage one political party over the other. The Supreme Court will address the constitutionality of that practice in one of the most highly anticipated cases of the current term.
Gill v. Whitford concerns the statewide redistricting plan adopted by the Wisconsin State Legislature in 2011 (Act 43). The plaintiff-appellees are a group of Wisconsin voters; they argue that Act 43 was passed by a Republican-controlled legislature for the purpose of entrenching the Republican legislators and that it unconstitutionally dilutes the voting strength of Democratic voters statewide. Specifically, appellees alleged that Act 43 illegally employed two gerrymandering techniques: “cracking”—dividing concentrated members of a political party into multiple districts so that they fail to reach a majority; and “packing”—joining members of a political party into one district, even if geographically disconnected, so that they win more easily.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]