Why Would A Court Let A ‘Blatant’ Gerrymander Stand? (Hint: Both Parties Do It…)

We interrupt this lifestyle blog with … political journalism. My piece on partisan redistricting was published today on Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball site. You can read the whole piece by clicking here.

The article focuses on the recent decision by a U.S. district court panel to let stand the congressional redistricting map drawn by the Democrats who controlled the process here in Illinois. Although the justices, in their ruling, described the Democrats’ effort to gain House seats through redistricting as “blatant,” their decision to uphold it was consistent with the historical pattern of the judiciary avoiding the “political thicket” of partisan gerrymandering.

As justified as the Illinois Republicans’ complaints might have been, their argument that the Democrats’ actions were unconstitutional are undermined by the fact that their own party did the same things in places where they controlled redistricting, such as Ohio, Pennsyvlania and North Carolina.

If you link to the story, please spend a few minutes cruising the excellent Crystal Ball site. Larry Sabato, a political scientist at University of Virginia, is one of the nation’s best political analysts, and it is a pleasure to be able to contribute to him and his crew in Charlottesville.