Michael Li 李之樸Verified account

And as importantly, they seemed to think that it would be relatively easy for courts to manage - a critical point because the manageability of any anti-gerrymandering has been a central worry for the court over the years. #fairmaps #ncpol 8/

Which is not to say that Chief Justice Roberts and/or Justice Alito are 'on board' but rather that the facts of North Carolina are so stark, it is hard for the court to avoid some really threshold constitutional questions. #fairmaps #ncpol 9/

If the North Carolina map isn't constitutionally problematic, it's hard to see what would be. North Carolina Republicans didn't just get caught red-handed robbing the bank, they had a press conference beforehand & said, ' we are going to rob the bank.' #fairmaps #ncpol 10/

And that result is in no way natural or inevitable. Before maps were redrawn in 2011, there were 7 Democrats and 6 Republicans in the NC congressional delegation. #fairmaps #ncpol 12/

The evidence at the trial court was even more powerful. Among the thousands of simulated maps drawn without regard to partisanship, not one resulted in a 10-3 GOP advantage. #fairmaps #ncpol 13/

You can rightly debate what the best split is - and lots of neutral considerations will affect whether a map is 8-6 one way or 6-8 the other (or some other split). But point is you only get to 10-3 by prioritizing politics above all other considerations. #fairmaps #ncpol 14/

But though the focus is on partisan effect (this is, after all, a partisan gerrymandering case), it's important not to overlook the racial impact of what happened in NC. #fairmaps #ncpol 15/

This is, after all, a case that originated in the court-ordered redraw of a map found to have discriminated against African-American voters. #fairmaps #ncpol 16/

The good news in the North Carolina case is that the court has a lot of theories on the table it can use to curb abuses like those that happened in NC in 2016. #fairmaps #ncpol 18/

For one thing, unlike last term's cases, which were brought exclusively by individual voters, the NC case includes claims brought by the North Carolina Democratic Party. #fairmaps #ncpol 19/

That's important because whatever the harm to individual voters' rights (an issue that sometimes has been a rabbit hole for the court), the party clearly is a principal target and victim of the gerrymander. #fairmaps #ncpol 20/

I mean the whole purpose of a political party is for like-minded people to be able to organize and win elections. But NC Republicans not only put their thumb on the scale, they largely made that task impossible. #fairmaps #ncpol 21/

The individual voters in the case also have raised claims under a variety of different parts of the Constitution: the Equal Protection Clause, the 1st Amendment, and the Elections Clause. #fairmaps #ncpol 22/

That gives the Supreme Court a lot to work with - the question for the court is which theory best gets at a harm that is pretty manifest but at the same time limits the risk of judicial over-extension into politics. #fairmaps #ncpol 23/

One note here about social science, which has been a big part of debates about gerrymandering in recent years: It's helpful but not essential in North Carolina. This, in short, is not a case about social science, much less constitutionalizing it. #fairmaps #ncpol 24/

In some cases where you lack direct evidence, social science can be helpful in identifying anomalous results. But in NC, Rs announced their intent beforehand *in public* and the map they got delivers what they wanted - a durable 10-3 advantage. #fairmaps #ncpol 25/

And though there is statistical evidence in the NC case about how anomalous a 10-3 map is in North Carolina, you don't even really need that. Tell the person on the street a party got 50% of the vote but 23% of the seats & the reaction is likely to be WTF. #fairmaps #ncpol 26/

And now onto the Maryland case, which will be the second partisan gerrymandering case the court hears on Tuesday. This will be the Maryland case's third trip to the high court. #fairmaps 27/

The first time the case went up to the Supreme Court on the question of whether a partisan gerrymandering claim was so frivolous that it could be dismissed without convening the three-judge panel required in redistricting cases. #fairmaps 28/

In his second to last opinion, Justice Scalia held that the claim was not so implausible as to rise to the level of frivolousness and a three-judge panel was convened and ruled 2-1 that the case could go forward. #fairmaps 29/

The case then went up to the Supreme Court a second time last term after the three-judge panel (which had not yet held a trial) declined to block use of the map for the 2018 election. #fairmaps 30/

However, rather than reach the merits of the Maryland plaintiffs' partisan gerrymandering claim, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the district court finding that the court had not abused its discretion in declining to block the map. #fairmaps 31/

The Maryland case is now back at SCOTUS after the trial court heard additional evidence and ruled that the redrawing of Maryland's 6th congressional district in 2011 was, indeed, an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. #fairmaps 32/

But enough about procedure! What is the Maryland case about? #fairmaps 33/

Let's start with the Maryland plaintiffs' legal theory - which is based solely on the First Amendment (in contrast to the NC case which involves equal protection and Elections Clause claims as well). #fairmaps 34/