Help Defeat Gerrymandering

Concerned Citizens for Democracy has successfully devised a nonpartisan set of principles for redistricting congressional and other legislative seats that creates a workable standard for any court in almost any state with any number of districts. 

Our policy paper describing the rules in detail can be found here.

• The principles are based on (1) the traditional neutral redistricting standards of contiguity, equal population, compactness, and no unnecessary division of counties and other political subdivisions, and (2) additional rules that geographically and geometrically detect and limit partisan gerrymandering.
  
•  The rules will allow courts to detect partisan gerrymandering by comparing proposed maps with underlying voter performance data. Moreover, the rules provide the courts with a workable neutral remedy to require legislatures to design maps in a nonpartisan manner.  
  
• These guidelines, based on the PA Constitution and the 1972 PA Congressional Map, were offered into evidence in the 2017-2018 Agre v. Wolf federal lawsuit against the gerrymandered 2011 PA Congressional map (see below for more details).
  
• CCFD's recommended redistricting guidelines help create electoral maps with fair partisan outcomes that will elect a spectrum of representatives ranging from strongly partisan to moderate in a way that matches the actual preferences of the voters in the state.
  
• The exemplar Congressional map shown below demonstrates the results of applying our guidelines to Pennsylvania.  We submitted it as an amicus proposal (available here) to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania during the remedial phase of the 2017-2018 League of Women Voters vs. PA lawsuit.  The Court's final approved map (also below) shares many key structural features with our proposal.

• On January 22, 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in the League of Women Voters v. PA state lawsuit against Pennsylvania's gerrymandered 2011 Congressional map, holding that the state’s congressional map “clearly, plainly, and palpably” violated the state constitution and blocking its use in the May 2018 primaries.
  
• The Court ordered the General Assembly to propose a new map for the Governor's review.  When the Assembly failed to do so, the Court opened the floor to parties and amici to submit their own proposed maps.  We submitted our methodology and proposed map as part of this process.
  
• Ultimately, the Court imposed a map of its own design, designed to comply with the traditional, non-partisan principals of redistricting laid out in the PA Constitution. The Court's map closely matched our proposed guidelines (and even some of our specific district lines!).
  
• This new map was in effect for the 2018 and 2020 Congressional elections.  Following the 2020 Census and reapportionment, the Congressional and state legislative districts for the next decade will be designed in 2021 and will take effect in 2022.  As new lines are drawn, our work becomes critically important to ensure fairness in electoral representation!

• We actively supported the Agre v. Wolf lawsuit against Pennsylvania's gerrymandered 2011 Congressional map, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in October 2017. The Agre case represented a fresh look at the federal Elections Clause in the U.S. Constitution, and argued that the Constitutional language does not grant authority to state legislatures to manipulate Congressional districts for partisan advantage. CCFD provided expert witnesses and legal and financial support to this important case.
  
• The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ruled two to one against the plaintiffs, on standing grounds. The U.S. Supreme Court denied plaintiffs’ appeal after ruling against several other major gerrymandering cases (particularly the Wisconsin suit, Gill v. Whitford).
  
• Want to know more?  The Brennan Center for Justice maintains an excellent summary and update of all recent and pending gerrymandering litigation. The site includes links to all of the opinions in Agre and the other redistricting cases.
  
  Recent Brennan Center redistricting updates are here.
  
  Their Agre v. Wolf document collection is here.
  
  Read Agre’s October 31, 2017 brief in opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss (available below). It’s a great and understandable explanation of Agre’s arguments under the Elections Clause and other provisions of the U.S. Constitution.