How the courts will react to a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Maryland's redistricting process, we can't say. The Supreme Court did recently strike down some of the congressional district boundaries in North Carolina, but that was on the relatively well-trodden ground of racial discrimination in redistricting. Maryland's case, and a few others percolating around the nation, rests on the argument that it is also unconstitutional to discriminate against members of a particular political party — in this state, Republicans, and in another case that's getting a lot of attention out of Wisconsin, Democrats. Justice Anthony Kennedy, considered a swing vote on the matter, expressed some willingness to consider partisan redistricting claims in a previous opinion, but whether the Maryland case or some other will present a viable standard for determining what is and isn't out of bounds is anybody's guess.
Nonetheless, Democratic lawmakers in Annapolis ought to give a good read to the deposition former Gov. Martin O'Malley made in the lawsuit, which was entered into the court file this week. The fact that he and others used the process to try to squeeze out one more Democratic seat in Maryland's delegation to the House of Representatives is no surprise. It was obvious at the time that the lines were drawn, and Mr. O'Malley has subsequently admitted it (and expressed regret for it). But we would ask the Democrats who have steadfastly blocked Republican Gov. Larry Hogan's efforts to institute non-partisan redistricting in Maryland to read through Mr. O'Malley's explanation of the process and imagine a second-term Mr. Hogan acting in his place the next time Maryland's lines are redrawn after the 2020 census.
O'Malley demands everybody "but" the dumbocRATs to play by the rules. His dictatorship ruling will be overturned.
ReplyDeleteHow long did it take you to come up with that clever post?
Delete