News Clips

“What’s really sad about all of this for Ohio voters: not that many people vote in primaries anyway," said Mia Lewis, associate director of the good-government group Common Cause Ohio. "What’s going to be the incentive for an Ohio voter to bother to pay attention and figure all of this out?”

Voter rights groups are suing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, his secretary of state and lawmakers in a bid to throw out redrawn congressional districts, saying the governor inappropriately influenced the once-a-decade process. The lawsuit was filed Friday in federal court in Tallahassee by Common Cause Florida and Fair Districts Now, two non-partisan groups advocating for good government. The complaint states DeSantis overstepped his executive powers to propose his own maps to favor Republicans. It says his plans violate state and federal laws protecting the redistricting process against partisan gerrymandering. DeSantis’ plans would likely eliminate two Black plurality districts. The lawsuit says his first plan also weakened one Hispanic district, favoring Republican candidates.

Bob Phillips, executive director of Common Cause North Carolina, a group defending the state's new districts, called Monday's action a victory. "We're pleased that the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the legislative defendants' shameless attempt to impose their gerrymandered congressional map upon North Carolina," Phillips said.

“If we can say only legislatures are able to make laws regarding the time, place, manner of elections, and courts don’t have any ability to change or constrain those laws, we’re really looking at a significant change in the balance of power between the three branches of state governments, as well as the level of intervention from federal courts in state lawmaking,” said Suzanne Almeida, redistricting counsel for Common Cause, a nonpartisan nonprofit involved in both the North Carolina and Pennsylvania cases.

"The elimination of state autonomy is inconsistent with the historical practice and the intent of the Election Clause and invites the risk that federal courts will wrongly interpret state law -- a significant risk given the difficulty federal courts have in mastering 50 different States' laws," Allison Riggs, a lawyer for Common Cause, argued in court papers. She said to accept the Republicans' argument "that partisan gerrymandering claims are immune from state constitutional scrutiny by state courts would require this Court to overrule a century of precedent." "It would lead to an unprecedented upheaval of current election law and foreclose any legal relief for voters from extreme legislation, which state courts already found to be undemocratic," Riggs said in an interview.

Allison Riggs, a lawyer representing Common Cause in the litigation, said GOP legislators were now “outrageously” attempting to insert the U.S. Supreme Court into state laws less than three years after the justices ruled state courts could use their own laws to curb partisan gerrymandering. “We are confident this specious attempt to undermine our judiciary will be rejected,” Riggs said in a news release. The U.S. Supreme Court told Common Cause and other litigants to respond to the stay request by Wednesday.