WI Supreme Court Adopts Governor's Redistricting Maps

A divided Wisconsin Supreme Court, on Thursday, adopted “least change” Legislative and Congressional Redistricting Maps submitted by Gov. Tony Evers (D), a Plan that largely preserves the current District Lines that give Republicans Majorities.

That means that Republicans are highly likely to remain in the Majority as they have been for the past Decade. But the Maps adopted by the Court, were Not as favorable to the GOP as other Alternatives submitted by the Republican-controlled Legislature and Conservatives that the Court Rejected.

Evers said in a Statement reacting to the Ruling. “The maps I submitted to the Court that were selected today are a vast improvement from the gerrymandered maps Wisconsin has had for the last decade and the even more gerrymandered Republicans maps that I vetoed last year."

The Conservative-controlled Court, had previously said it would Not make significant Changes to the Boundary Lines that were already in place and created by Republicans in 2011, limiting the ability of Evers and Liberals to submit Maps more favorable to Democrats.

The Evers Maps would elect 44 Democrats and 55 Republicans in the Assembly, and 13 Democrats and 20 Republicans in the Senate, based on an Analysis from the Governor's Office. Currently, Republicans hold a 61-38 Majority in the Assembly and 21-12 Advantage in the Senate.

Republicans would win Five Congressional Seats and Democrats would have Three, the same breakdown as it is now, according to Evers' Office.

Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-9th District, Oostburg), said in a Statement released Thursday night: “Evers drew racially gerrymandered maps behind closed doors with no public input. His maps intentionally watered down minority representation for political gain and violated the open and transparent process the public deserved."

Justice Brian Hagedorn, who is often a Swing Vote on the Court, wrote the 4-3 Majority Opinion. He was joined by the Court's Three Liberal Justices, while the Three Conservatives Dissented.

“We said we would choose maps that minimize changes from current law and evaluate maps for compliance with state and federal law,” Hagedorn wrote for the Majority. “In so concluding, we rejected an approach that involved this court making significant policy decisions or weighing competing policy criteria."










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker