Gerrymandering is alive and well in the United States. After the dust settled on our nation’s once-a-decade redistricting process, congressional district maps from 12 states face ongoing lawsuits for either partisan or racial gerrymandering. Below is a complete guide to the states where gerrymandering is likely to warp our electoral outcomes next week.

Before diving in any further, I want to raise up some of the awesome work being done by The Democracy Group to safeguard American democracy.

Are you worried about our democracy in America? Democracy is in danger and needs your help now more than ever. That's why my friends at The Democracy Group have created a community and network of 16 podcasts united around the goal of helping listeners understand what's broken in our democracy, and how people are working together to fix it. They’ve recently launched a timely podcast series titled 2022 Midterms: What’s at Stake? Definitely give it a listen!

For a refresher, there are two types of gerrymanders: partisan gerrymanders and racial gerrymanders. Partisan gerrymanders are maps that unfairly favor a specific political party by drawing lines in such a way that a party can capture more seats than they receive votes for. Racial gerrymanders are maps that unfairly disadvantage a specific racial group by drawing lines that prevent minorities from electing their own members to Congress. It’s important to denote the type of gerrymander as it determines how the case is adjudicated. In Gill V. Whitford (2018), the US Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymanders are not federally barred via the Constitution. This forces state courts to hear these cases as they’re outside of the jurisdiction of federal courts. Racial gerrymandering cases however are unconstitutional via the 14th Amendment and are all sent to federal courts (who then typically refer them to SCOTUS).

Republicans Map Out Their Racism

While both parties have engaged in partisan gerrymandering already this cycle, Republicans consistently draw maps that test (and subsequently erode) federal protections for racial gerrymandering. The seven states with outstanding racial gerrymandering lawsuits previously had federal legal protections explicitly designed to prevent all of this from happening. All of these states would have been required to redraw their maps months ago had SCOTUS not struck down a key part of the Voting Rights Act back in 2013.

Why Are We Using These Maps?

SCOTUS put a hold on a federal court case that demanded Alabama redraw its congressional district maps for racial gerrymandering. While this decision doesn’t explicitly validate the maps in the eyes of the court, it does allow the map to stand for the upcoming election while the court hears the case. (The court isn’t expected to release a decision until months after the election.) In defense of the stay, the majority cited the Purcell principle, an idea that courts shouldn’t make decisions that change election rules during the period just prior to an election.

“In short, the Purcell principle requires that we stay the District Court’s injunction with respect to the 2022 elections. The Court has recognized that ‘practical considerations sometimes require courts to allow elections to proceed despite pending legal challenges.’ So it is here. If the District Court’s judgment is eventually affirmed after appellate review, the injunction can take effect for congressional elections that occur after 2022.”

-Justice Brett Kavanaugh in his written opinion

SCOTUS has since cited the same principle in its decision to reverse a similar lower court ruling in Louisiana, which dimmed the prospects of other federal racial gerrymandering cases.

In layman’s terms: because SCOTUS can’t (or won’t) act quickly enough, we just gotta suck it up and use the maps we’ve got, no matter how unfair they may be or who they may disenfranchise. (HINT: This is what systemic racism looks like in practice.)

(Since partisan gerrymandering lawsuits are heard by state courts, it’s up to each state if their high court chose to hear the case prior to election day. States like Maryland and New York addressed their partisan gerrymanders earlier in the year while others like Nevada and Utah have not yet been decided by state courts.)

So What Can We Do?

VOTE. Even if you’re voting under less-than-ideal circumstances like in the states above, voting is better than doing nothing. Vote not just on federal legislators but also the state legislators that were responsible for drawing your state’s congressional district lines. If you feel disenfranchised, vote them out! (Conversely, support people who support fair and open elections!)

After you’re done voting, educate yourself on existing gerrymandering cases. There’s a lot of hand-wringing about politicians who are a “threat to democracy” to the point that it’s slowly becoming a talking point that voters ignore. BE SPECIFIC! Tell your friends and family EXACTLY HOW our democracy is being attacked. Below you will find links to all of my previous posts related to these gerrymandering cases. Hopefully this batch of content can help you spread the word!

Active Racial Gerrymandering Cases

• Alabama

• Arkansas

• Florida

• Georgia

• Louisiana

• South Carolina

• Texas

Active Partisan Gerrymandering Cases

• Ohio

• Kentucky

• Nevada

• New Mexico

• Utah