New York high court says Democrats gerrymandered, tosses map

New York state’s highest court threw out a congressional map drawn by Democrats that would’ve likely cut Republican held seats from eight to four. The court ruled that the map was a partisan gerrymander that violated redistricting reforms passed in 2014.

Hans Pennink/AP/File
The New York State Capitol is pictured on April 4, 2022. On Wednesday, the New York Court of Appeals, the state's highest court, threw out what the majority ruled was a gerrymandered congressional map drawn by statehouse Democrats.

New York’s highest court on Wednesday rejected new congressional maps that had widely been seen as favoring Democrats, largely agreeing with Republican voters who argued the district boundaries were unconstitutionally gerrymandered.

The decision may delay New York’s primary elections by as much as two months and is likely a hammer-blow to Democrats’ national redistricting hopes, which leaned heavily on their ability to gerrymander New York state to maximize the number of seats they could win in the U.S. House of Representatives.

The state’s Court of Appeals said the Democratic-led Legislature lacked the authority to redraw congressional and state Senate maps after an independent redistricting commission charged with crafting new maps failed to reach a consensus.

The judges also said lawmakers gerrymandered the congressional maps to Democrats’ favor, in violation of a 2014 constitutional amendment designed to root out political gamesmanship in redistricting.

The Appeals Court handed authority to draw new district maps to an expert, known as a special court master, instead of the Legislature.

“Prompt judicial intervention is both necessary and appropriate to guarantee the People’s right to a free and fair election,” said the court’s opinion, written by Chief Judge Janet DiFiore.

The ruling didn’t specify a deadline for the adoption of new maps. But the judges said they were sending the matter to a lower state court, which “shall adopt constitutional maps with all due haste.”

It will “likely be necessary,” Judge DiFiore wrote, to move the congressional and state Senate primary elections from June 28 to August, to give time for the maps to be redrawn and for candidates and elections officials to adapt their plans.

The state elections board said it didn’t anticipate that the primary date would change for other races, including governor and assembly.

The decision comes as a major blow to Democrats in their struggle to prevent Republicans from retaking control of the U.S. House.

Because of new population data from the 2020 census, New York is set to lose one seat in Congress in 2021. The maps devised by the Legislature would have given Democrats a strong majority of registered voters in 22 of the state’s 26 congressional districts. Right now, Republicans currently hold eight of the state’s 27 seats.

Democrats hoped a redistricting map favorable to their party in New York might help offset expected losses in other states where Republicans control state government.

“While we are disappointed with the Court’s ruling, we remain confident in Democratic victories up and down the ballot this November,” said Jay Jacobs, the chairman of the New York Democratic Party.

Former New York Republican Rep. John Faso called it a “landmark decision” and told reporters on a call Wednesday evening that the ruling is a signal to future legislatures to follow the letter of the state’s voter-approved redistricting law.

“It’ll force bipartisan cooperation and that’s what the people voted for,” he said.

Under a process passed by voters in 2014, New York’s new district maps were supposed to have been drawn by an independent commission. But that body, made up of equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans, couldn’t agree on one set of maps. The Democratic-controlled Legislature then stepped in and created its own maps, quickly signed into law by Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat.

The Court of Appeals, made up of judges appointed entirely by Democratic governors, sided with the Republican plaintiffs who argued the Legislature sidestepped the process set forth in the 2014 reforms, including a provision in the state constitution barring the redrawing of districts for partisan gain.

“The legislature responded by creating and enacting maps in a nontransparent manner controlled exclusively by the dominant political party – doing exactly what they would have done had the 2014 constitutional reforms never been passed,” Judge DiFiore wrote.

Four out of seven judges on the Court of Appeals joined in the majority opinion, with a fifth agreeing that the Senate and congressional maps were unconstitutional on procedural grounds.

Attorneys for Democrats argued the Legislature was legally allowed to craft its own maps when the redistricting commission failed to reach a consensus. Democrats also said their maps reflected population shifts and united similar geographic and cultural communities, split apart by earlier rounds of gerrymandering.

But the judges took Democrats to task for crafting maps that reduced the number of competitive districts, and for asking the court to essentially “nullify” the 2014 reforms.

In the majority opinion, Judge DiFiore said upholding the tainted process would only encourage partisans involved in the Independent Redistricting Commission process to avoid consensus in the future, too, “thereby permitting the legislature to step in and create new maps merely by engineering a stalemate at any stage of the IRC process.”

Two lower-level courts had also ruled the maps were unconstitutional and gave the Legislature an April 30 deadline to draw new maps or else leave the task to a court-appointed expert. That deadline has now been set aside.

In the meantime, candidates have already begun campaigning in the new districts, despite being unsure whether those districts will still exist by the time voting begins.

This story was reported by The Associated Press. Associated Press writer Nicholas Riccardi in Denver contributed to this report.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to New York high court says Democrats gerrymandered, tosses map
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today