Dem Filing Sets Up Federal Court Showdown on Legislative Maps
In a federal court filing last week, lawyers for Senate President Don Harmon (above) and House Speaker Chris Welch noted a lawsuit over legislative redistricting maps boiled down to little more than hurt feelings. It likely sets up a showdown in federal court early next month.
In a federal court filing right before Thanksgiving, attorneys defending the legislative maps drawn and approved by Democratic legislators argued new legislative maps “inevitably disappoint” some constituencies.
But Republicans, as well as the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) and NAACP have argued the maps distinctly diminish the influence of those minority groups, which are protected under federal law.
More from Capitol News Illinois:
In their court filing Wednesday, however, lawyers for the Democratic leaders denied any constitutional or legal violation.
“The September Redistricting Plan ... protects minority voting strength and provides Hispanic and Black voters more than an equal opportunity to elect candidates of their choice,” their brief states. “The three plaintiffs have failed to provide evidence to support otherwise and have not demonstrated that the September Redistricting Plan violates the Voting Rights Act or the U.S. Constitution.”
Earlier this month, the three sets of plaintiffs submitted their proposed revisions to the maps. MALDEF proposed changes in the Chicago area that would create 10 largely-Latino districts in the Chicago area, while Republicans proposed creating an 11th Latino district in Aurora.
The NAACP plaintiffs and the Republicans both proposed redrawing the Metro East region to create a largely-Black House district in East St. Louis.
In their response Wednesday, however, the Democratic leaders argue that none of those proposals overlap with each other and that each would have ripple effects that would affect neighboring districts that have not been contested.
“In other words, plaintiffs have proposed three competing remedial plans, with no proposal for reconciling the differences,” attorneys for the Democrats wrote.
The 90-page filing likely means a December 7 showdown in federal court over the maps, which could be changed, thrown out, or kept in tact just as candidates are to begin circulating petitions after the first of the year.