The US Supreme Court on Monday by declined to review a request from an ACLU led group of left wing Kansas voters regarding a state court ruling that they claim allows for racial gerrymandering of congressional districts.
In a contentious decision last year, the Kansas Supreme Court upheld a Republican-drawn map that had previously been blocked by a lower court over partisan gerrymandering and the dilution of minority voting strength.
This new congressional map divided Wyandotte County – home to Kansas City – into two congressional districts for the first time in several decades. The court’s decision to not hear the case means that the newly redrawn map will remain in place.
Advertisement - story continues below
Kansas had requested that the US Supreme Court not take the case, arguing in court papers that it lacked jurisdiction in the matter and that the state court had made the correct decision.
The group of left wing voters, represented by the ACLU, the ACLU of Kansas, and the Campaign Legal Center, contended that the Kansas Supreme Court “held that intentional racial discrimination in redistricting is unconstitutional only if it prevents the formation of a majority-minority district.”
Stop the censors, sign up to get today's top stories delivered right to your inbox
According to the group of voters, this interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment implies that when minority voters are less numerous or more dispersed, states can intentionally discriminate against them when drawing districts, even if the legislature explicitly stated that it acted to disadvantage minority voters.
The ACLU led group asked the justices to consider whether the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits “intentional racial discrimination in redistricting where the minority voters discriminated against are not sufficiently numerous to form a majority of eligible voters in a single-member district.”
Advertisement - story continues below
By declining to hear this case, the Supreme Court has demonstrated its commitment to upholding the integrity of the redistricting process and sends a clear message that it trusts the Kansas Supreme Court’s judgment in this matter, and that the lower court had thoroughly examined the case before making its decision.
As conservatives, we should applaud the Supreme Court’s refusal to intervene in this matter.
It is a win for the principle of federalism and the respect for state courts to handle their cases.
The court’s decision to let the newly redrawn map stand ensures that the electoral process in Kansas remains fair and unbiased, allowing the voters to have their voices heard without unnecessary interference from the federal judiciary.
This outcome is a victory for the democratic process and a reaffirmation of the importance of states’ rights in our nation’s system of governance.
