“All elections shall be free.”
This was the key sentence from North Carolina’s state constitution that led to a 3-0 vote regarding the use of partisan gerrymandering throughout the state. On September 3, 2019, a North Carolina trial court determined that legislative district maps drawn in 2017 by the Republican Party were heavily gerrymandered, resulting in unfair elections.
Gerrymandering is dividing election districts in a way that is favorable to one party, therefore giving advantage to that party through the voting process. Its intent is to boost or suppress certain demographics within a region, such as varying racial, religious or class groups.
The case, named Common Cause v. Lewis, was brought to the state trial court by advocacy group Common Cause, the North Carolina Democratic Party and a few Democratic voters. The New York Times reported that in the 2018 House elections, Democrats won more than 50 percent of statewide votes, but Republicans received about 54 percent of the North Carolina seats. With a similar situation occurring with the Senate elections, it was clear that some form of gerrymandering had occurred, specifically against minority groups.
The court’s decision was presented in a 357-page ruling that said, “Extreme partisan gerrymandering does not fairly and truthfully ascertain the will of the people. Voters are not freely choosing their representatives. Rather, representatives are choosing their voters. It is not the will of the people that is fairly ascertained through extreme partisan gerrymandering. Rather, it is the will of the map drawers that prevails.”
North Carolina’s legislative maps will be redrawn by September 18, 2019. The court requires that the maps are drawn from scratch (without influence of old drawings) and created in a public setting so that lawmakers and public observers may be present.
Democracy is meant to represent the public. The manipulation of this representation denies not only the voters but the structure itself. A democratic government cannot properly function if the people’s votes are not fairly accounted for.
The decision in North Carolina comes after the U.S. Supreme Court deemed that cases regarding district maps were “too political” in June 2019. CNN reported that the Court came to a 5-4 vote and claimed that, ultimately, it was up to the states to “fill the void” in cases of partisan gerrymandering.
Along with a Pennsylvania decision in February 2018, North Carolina’s court decision shows that states can take action against partisan gerrymandering. Most state constitutions include words like “free” or “equal” in regard to the voting process, making Pennsylvania and North Carolina models for other states on how to protect voters against gerrymandering.
By following North Carolina’s lead, states can ensure fair district boundaries with court decisions. Another way to draw unbiased maps would be to create redistricting commissions, which has been adopted by 21 states (either in the form of non-partisan or bipartisan commissions). This would allow for district lines to be created without political influence or in consideration of both sides.
One political party shouldn’t control the state, especially if that party is doing it unfairly. These decisions show that democracy can and should exist without the extreme control of a political party. Political leaders are meant to serve the people, not their own personal or political agendas.
Ultimately, the issue of partisan gerrymandering is not based on one’s political beliefs or identity. It is an issue that inhibits democracy for all American citizens, regardless of association with a political party. Voting is a critical aspect of our governmental system, and to invalidate it goes against what the United States is meant to stand for.
Maddie Peters can be reached at pete9542@stthomas.edu.