Thursday, May 27, 2021

Ohio And Census Bureau Settlement Over Release Of Redistricting Data

Ohio Attorney General, Dave Yost (R), announced that the State had reached, a Settlement Agreement with the Census Bureau, in its Lawsuit over its Plan to Deliver Redistricting Data to the States by September 30th, 2021, instead of April 1st, 2021, the Deadline set forth in Federal Statutes.

Under the Settlement, the Census Bureau Agreed to Deliver Redistricting Data, in a Legacy Format, by August 16th, 2021.

The Legacy Format would present the Data in Raw Form without the Data Tables and other Access Tools the Census Bureau will Ultimately prepare for the States.

The Census Bureau also Agreed to deliver Biweekly Updates, and, in August, Weekly Updates, on its Progress.

As of May 26th, 2021, the Census Bureau had Not Commented Publicly on the Settlement.

Whatever Numbers are delivered by the Census Bureau, those Numbers will be an, Undercount of Residents, due to the Pandemic Cutting Short the Count.

Redistricting in other States:

Illinois: State Lawmakers released their Proposed Maps for the Illinois State Senate and the Illinois House of Representatives on May 21st, becoming the Second State, after Oklahoma, in the 2020 Redistricting Cycle to Produce Draft Maps.

The Illinois General Assembly is Responsible for Both Congressional and State Legislative Redistricting. Redistricting Plans are subject to Gubernatorial Veto. Illinois is a Democratic Trifecta, meaning that Democrats Control the Governorship, and Majorities in both Chambers of the General Assembly.

Wisconsin : the State Supreme Court Denied a Petition for a Proposed Rule by which the State Supreme Court would have assumed Original Jurisdiction over Redistricting Lawsuits on May 14th. When a Court assumes Original Jurisdiction, it has the "power to hear and decide a matter before any other court can review the manner."

On June 3rd, 2020, Attorney Richard M. Esenberg, Brian McGrath, and Anthony F. LoCoco, on behalf of Scott Jensen and the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, filed the Petition for the Proposed Rule, saying that the State Supreme Court had, in Jensen v. Wisconsin Elections Board (2002), "noted that redistricting was primarily a state and not a federal responsibility ... but nevertheless deferred to the federal courts because of the perceived procedural problem of a lack of rules for such a case in [the state supreme court."

The Petitioners asked the Court to Adopt the Proposed Rule "to cure the perceived procedural problems it noted in Jensen."

In an Unsigned Order Denying the Petition, the Court said, "The court determined that, as drafted, the procedures proposed in this administrative rule petition are unlikely to materially aid this court's consideration of an as yet undefined future redistricting challenge, and voted to deny the petition."

NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

No comments: