Caitlin McKown/UW Applied Population Lab

Series: Gerrymandering, Wisconsin And The Courts

It's an unsavory truth in American democracy that politicians, to some extent, do get to choose their voters. The party in power often tries to draw state legislative and U.S. House of Representatives district maps to its own advantage, and courts have been reluctant to stop it unless there's strong evidence of racial discrimination. The Republican wave of election victories in 2010, and the increasing sophistication of redistricting software set the stage for an aggressive new batch of legislative maps in Wisconsin and other states. Multiple federal lawsuits challenging this redistricting followed. One court challenge arising from Wisconsin, Gill v. Whitford, set out to prove that partisan gerrymandering could violate voters' rights even if it wasn't racially discriminatory. The case reached the U. S. Supreme Court, and the resulting decision could trigger a seismic change in how political parties consolidate electoral power.
 
Wisconsin is at the center of Gill v. Whitford , a lawsuit related to legislative redistricting heard by United States Supreme Court in October 2017. Malia Jones of the University of Wisconsin Applied Population Laboratory discusses how partisan gerrymandering works.
A WisContext report about partisan voting patterns in Wisconsin was cited in an amicus brief submitted by the Republican National Committee in Gill v. Whitford , a case appearing before the U.S. Supreme Court. Malia Jones of the UW Applied Population Lab discusses this report and what was argued in the amicus brief.
The U.S. Supreme Court will rule on a Wisconsin case that could have major ramifications across the national political spectrum. Gill v. Whitford centers on a dispute over whether Wisconsin's Republican-drawn legislative boundaries constitute unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering.
Two federal judges ruled that the Wisconsin Legislature's Assembly district map unconstitutional, with a third dissenting. They ruled Assembly Republicans exhibited partisan gerrymandering beyond what is constitutional in creating these maps.
A federal trial will determine whether Wisconsin Assembly district boundaries the Republican-led Legislature redrew in 2011 are an unconstitutional gerrymander against voters for Democratic candidates.
The U.S. Supreme Court handed down a non-decision on Wisconsin's gerrymandering case, Gill v. Whitford , referring it to a lower court to sort through a technicality.
Shared via
WPT
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal courts must stay out of cases involving partisan gerrymandering. UW-Madison political science professor and Elections Research Center director Barry Burden discusses what the decision means for Gill v. Whitford .
Shared via
WPT
As the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments in the Gill v. Whitford lawsuit over partisan gerrymandering, WPR capitol bureau chief Shawn Johnson breaks down the case and shares his insight on where the justices are leaning.
Shared via
PBS Wisconsin
In his 2020 State of the State address, Gov. Tony Evers laid out plans for a nonpartisan redistricting commission for Wisconsin. UW-Madison political science professor Ken Mayer discusses what a "People's Map Commission" on redistricting can achieve.
Audio: 
Shared via
WPR
The conservative group Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty is trying to get a jump on the next round of legislative redistricting, proposing a rule change that would require that any lawsuit over political maps run through the Wisconsin Supreme Court.