Topline Takeaways

• Republicans held complete control in redistricting, due to their majorities in North Carolina’s General Assembly. (North Carolina’s governor holds no veto power over the redistricting process.)

• Mapmakers committed to a “race-blind” process where racial data would be excluded from consideration when drawing new districts. Despite this decision, the new map still overwhelmingly favors Republican candidates and arguably dilutes the voting power of the state’s Black voters.

• The North Carolina Supreme Court agreed that the new maps violate the state constitution due to partisan gerrymandering and required the legislature to submit new maps within two weeks. (A second case was filed alleging a racial gerrymander. This case was invalidated after the decision on the partisan gerrymandering case threw out the maps in question.)

Who’s In Control?

In North Carolina, Republicans have complete control of the redistricting process as they hold majorities in both state houses and are unrestrained by the state’s current Democratic governor. The state’s legislature is the sole arbiter when drawing and validating new districts as the governor holds no veto power over redistricting. The North Carolina General Assembly passed the original map in early November.

Shortly thereafter, Democrats filed a lawsuit, alleging that both the new congressional and legislative maps held partisan gerrymanders that violated the state constitution. While an initial trial court upheld the maps, an appeal sent the case to the state Supreme Court. (A second lawsuit was also filed, alleging a racial gerrymander.)

The state Supreme Court agreed that the new maps violate the state constitution and required the legislature to submit new maps within two weeks.

[Invalidated] District Breakdown

The North Carolina Supreme Court ruling is a bit more consequential for national redistricting than the recent ruling in Ohio, primarily due to the nuts-and-bolts of the ruling. In Ohio’s case, their state’s court found that mapmakers violated explicit language found in a constitutional amendment that directly referenced redistricting. In North Carolina’s case, the court believed that mapmakers violated much broader language in the state’s constitution including, “the free elections clause, the equal protection clause, the free speech clause and the freedom of assembly clause of North Carolina’s constitution.” This cracks open the door for partisan gerrymandering cases in other states as it helps establish a broader precedent for striking down partisan gerrymandering cases. It proves that remedies may be available even if a state does not have iron-clad redistricting rules like Ohio’s.

Republicans Embrace “Race-Blind” Redistricting

While the case that invalidated the congressional map was focused explicitly on partisan gerrymandering, many also believe the invalidated map was also racially gerrymandered due to the way Republicans turned a blind-eye toward the use of race data.

The problem with drawing “race-blind” districts is that you risk entrenching historical inequities. Republicans voted to exclude the use of racial data in North Carolina’s map-making process because they believed that including the data would have been a little too ‘racist.’ NC Republicans’ stated belief is that “there’s no sufficient evidence of racially polarized voting in North Carolina to justify the consideration of race when drawing districts.” (Let’s not ignore the fact that Republicans have never bothered to seek out such evidence, or their role in propagating such patterns.)

This leads to a compounding issue when excluding racial data: you can’t assess progress if you’re not tracking indicators of success. Joselle Torres of Democracy NC puts it succinctly:

“Analyzing racial data when drawing maps is essential to a fair, equitable and constitutional redistricting process. While race cannot be the predominant factor in drawing voting maps, it is impossible to determine whether voting districts comply with the VRA without looking at racial data.”

But let’s be realistic… Slavery happened here. Jim Crow laws happened here. Both partisan and racial gerrymandering happened here literally just last cycle. The effects of these persistent racial injustices undeniably result in a clear, racially polarized voting pattern. Mapmakers need to use race data to ensure that, at minimum, new districts don’t perpetuate the cycle of racial injustice.

Leftover Links

• NC mapmakers committed to a ‘color-blind’ redistricting process where racial data would be ignored. See exactly how mapmakers who “don’t see color” may draw maps that violate the Voting Rights Act.

• Learn more about the racial gerrymandering lawsuit against the now invalidated maps