History

Gerrymandering is no stranger to the United States of America. Dating back to 18th Century English Parliament, lines have been redrawn to create favorable conditions for candidates in places called “rotten boroughs.” These practices carried over to colonial America but were not as fully developed until America became divided amongst the political parties of the Democratic-Republicans and the Federalists.

In the early 19th century, Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry was infamous for redrawing State districts to benefit his party, the Democratic-Republicans. The term “gerrymandering” is a mix of “Gerry” and “salamander.” Though Gerry did not create gerrymandering, he is most famous for how prominent his gerrymandering was in Massachusetts. Federalist papers printed about the mass corruption in their opposing party, as the Democratic-Republicans received 49% of the vote but represented 29 out of 40 in the U.S. House of Representatives. Eventually, the Federalists won back the power in the state and redrew the districts to be more fair to all.

However, gerrymandering would continue in the United States. After the end of the Civil War, black men were recognized as citizens of the USA. Southern men were quick to redraw the districts to benefit the Democratic party, which the Southern white men most widely supported at the time. They attempted to put all the black voters into one district. However, since most people in the South voting were white men voting Democrat, the need to redraw the districts was lost. North Carolina’s 12th district famously became known as the “1-85 district,” as it became so narrow at one point it was more narrow than the highway itself. 

Of course, this is now illegal, as this was done at a time when state legislatures let states pick how to redraw their districts. Then came the “Reapportionment Revolution” under Chief Justice Earl Warren, where a series of court cases were passed making redistricting illegal. Ultimately, the USA Census was formulated under the impression that all districts would represent the same number of people under a representative from the House with a redrawing every ten years. This would make it so that districts would be of varying sizes but would ultimately all represent the same population to squash unfairness.

Though the Census makes the redrawing more fair, groups like the Brennan Center for Justice still advocate for voting fairness.

Gerrymandering Policy

The American democratic system depends on the citizen’s right to vote, but one key technicality that has been exploited countless times throughout history is gerrymandering, which is the act of changing political boundaries such that it favors a specific group of people rather than being equitable to all people. Political officials commit gerrymandering to give them a leg up in elections and re-elections. For example, they might focus all of the populations with people of color in them into a singular voting group, so they can’t make an impact on all of the other voting districts and potentially overturn decisions there. As a result, one of the most important tasks for us is to look into how policy can prevent gerrymandering from happening and destroy a more fair democratic system from taking shape.

Currently, the biggest piece of legislation in place to combat gerrymandering is the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which is a piece of legislation that is oriented toward preventing racial discrimination in voting. This act has had a unique impact on gerrymandering because one of the simplest uses of gerrymandering is to form districts around condensing certain races, which may potentially be harmful to someone’s campaign into a singular district, so they can’t hurt the campaigner’s other voting districts which they are more likely to win. As a result, the Voting Rights Act can combat the race-based gerrymandering that currently happens. In 2022 the NAACP sued Thomas Alexander, the president of South Carolina’s senate, because of clear indications of gerrymandering in the map and an indication that it was done based on race. Thus, the Supreme Court ruling on this case will be something that shapes how racial gerrymandering works in the US.

One key piece of legislation that was proposed was The Freedom to Vote Act, which is oriented toward solving partisan gerrymandering, protecting voting rights, and improving campaign finances. The Freedom to Vote Act can help combat gerrymandering because of its requirements for strict and uniform rules for congressional redistricting, including a ban on partisan gerrymandering and increased protections for communities of color to ensure their rights are protected. Additionally, the bill allows for more transparency in the new maps and a streamlined process for challenging gerrymandered maps in courts. The second provisional that this bill contains is very important because currently, the Supreme Court has made some of the largest decisions in the context of gerrymandering, but the process takes lots of time, and without clear provisions as to what a constitutional map is, the courts require tons of time to validate these maps. As a result, the parts of this bill oriented towards solving gerrymandering are very positive steps and clearly in the right direction.

‍