WASHINGTON (CN) - Rebuffing an emergency request from the state's Republican Party, the Supreme Court on Wednesday gave the green light to a new congressional map favoring Democrats ahead of the midterm election in November.
The high court did not explain its decision in the brief order denying the application. There were no noted dissents.
California Governor Gavin Newsom successfully lobbied voters and state legislators to redraw the state's congressional map after Republicans took up President Donald Trump's bid to add GOP-friendly seats in Texas.
In December, the Supreme Court's conservative majority reprimanded a lower court for throwing out Texas' newly minted map "on the eve of an election." But California Republicans urged the justices to throw out the Golden State's new map over a month later.
California said the justices shouldn't be naive to the partisan aims behind the party's application, noting how the federal government supported Texas' redraw but opposed California's. The state said it was a natural political objective for Republicans to want to retain their majority in the House of Representatives, just like Democrats want to counteract their strategy.
"But what is deeply unnatural - indeed, contrary to fundamental principles of democracy and judicial impartiality - is plaintiffs' request for this court to step into the political fray, granting one political party a sizeable advantage by enjoining California's partisan gerrymander after having allowed Texas' to take effect," the state wrote. "This court's role is to 'say what the law is,' not to 'allocate political power and influence.'"
California voters approved a measure known as Proposition 50 last year to temporarily set aside the state's independent redistricting citizens commission to draw a new congressional map favoring Democrats.
Advocating for the measure, Newsom argued the Golden State had to fight fire with fire, canceling out five Republican seats added to Texas' map by eliminating five GOP seats in the Golden State.
The Republican Party challenged California's new maps as a racial gerrymander a day after Proposition 50 was approved by voters. In their emergency application, the California Republicans argue that while the state claimed it was engaged in partisan and not racial gerrymandering, the court should have seen that California used "race as a 'proxy' for politics."
"Under the guise of partisan line-drawing, California expressly used race as the 'predominant factor' in placing 'a significant number of voters within or without' Congressional District 13," the Republicans wrote. "If left uncorrected, this pernicious and unconstitutional use of race will irreparably harm applicants and the public."
Specifically, the Republicans argue California moved to maximize Latino voting strength to "shore up Latino support for the Democratic Party," pointing to statements by mapmaker Paul Mitchell, who stated his goal was to bolster Latino districts, particularly in the Central Valley.
According to the Republicans, Mitchell redrew Congressional District 13 to bypass heavily Democratic white neighborhoods near Stockton in favor of capturing less Democratic Latino areas. Further, expert testimony and alternative maps presented to the panel showed race rather than politics predominated in drawing that district's lines.
A three-judge panel rejected the state party's challenge, finding no evidence of a racial gerrymander.
California said Republicans had resisted the mountain of evidence that voters intended to enact a partisan gerrymander favoring Democrats. The state said its maps had the same number of Latino-majority districts before and after Proposition 50.
"It would be passing strange for California to undertake a mid-decade restricting effort with the predominant purpose of benefitting Latino voters and then enact a new map that contains an identical number of Latino-majority districts," California wrote.
Source: Courthouse News Service
