WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, sharply criticized the rampant gerrymandering that is rigging our democracy, as the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Monday in the case of Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission.
“Partisan gerrymandering is a corrosive practice that uses voters as pawns and data points, rather than the sovereign source of the government’s authority,” Senator Coons said. “While the practice may not be new, the ability of modern-day software to manipulate detailed demographic data has given those in charge of redistricting power that would have been unthinkable when the term ‘Gerry-mander’ was coined over two hundred years ago.”
In the case pending before it, the Supreme Court is being asked to rule whether the Constitution permits citizens in states that provide for a direct democracy mechanism to use the referendum or ballot initiative process to establish non-partisan redistricting commissions. Such commissions — variations of which are in place for congressional redistricting in at least seven states — represent attempts by states to blunt the harms of partisan gerrymandering and, in so doing, make democracy work better.
“Time and time again, the Supreme Court has criticized the practice of gerrymandering, while at the same time refusing to stop it,” Senator Coons continued, in reference to Supreme Court decisions stating that courts lacked judicially manageable tools to combat redistricting. “So when the people of a state — in this case Arizona — rise up and empower themselves and their institutions to take on gerrymandering, I would hope that the Supreme Court would applaud these laboratories of democracy, rather than stand in their way.”