Top court throws out congressional, State Senate redistricting maps

New York’s top court on Wednesday threw out congressional redistricting maps that it said were illegally gerrymandered to bolster Democrats, a ruling that will have implications not only in the state but in the national fight for control of Congress.

In a sharply divided 4-3 decision, the Court of Appeals not only disqualified the new maps for New York’s congressional districts but also for the State Senate.

In throwing out maps the State Legislature approved earlier this year, the court upheld two lower court rulings that sided with Republican litigants.

Further, the top court endorsed a remedy proposed by a lower-court judge: Allowing a neutral “special master” to redraw New York’s congressional map.

That likely will force the movement of the state’s congressional and State Senate primaries from June to August, the Court of Appeals said. 

But it might leave New York with a messy political calendar with primaries for governor, lieutenant governor and state Assembly still locked in for June 28. 

All of it was under discussion Wednesday afternoon in the hours following the ruling, officials said. "We are reviewing the decision," said Mike Murphy, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins (D-Yonkers), whom Republicans had sued along with Gov. Kathy Hochul and Assembly Majority Leader Carl Heastie (D-Bronx).

It also could result in many candidates switching, joining or dropping out of many races, depending on the new lines. All the work candidates did to gather petitions and strategize their campaigns "is out the window," said Michael Dawidziak, a Republican consultant who is working for Rep. Andrew Garbarino (R-Bayport).

For now, what is known is the top court now has upheld Steuben County Judge Patrick McAllister's preliminary decision to appoint a "special master" — Jonathan Cervas, a Carnegie Mellon University political scientist and redistricting expert — to redraw lines in case the lawsuit was successful. McAllister has slated a hearing for May 6 in Steuben County, where the Republican lawsuit originated, and he has set a May 16 deadline for Cervas to produce the new maps, according to a Republican lawyer in the case. The court will then take comments and release a final map on May 24.

Beyond New York, the ruling could have implications in the national battle for Congress. While Republicans were trying to use redistricting to their advantage in other states, New York was one "blue" state Democrats were counting on to help them.

The new maps had shifted the number of Democratic-leaning congressional districts in New York from 19 to 22 and decreased Republican ones from eight to four, analysts have said. New York is losing one congressional seat this year, going from 27 to 26.

Losing the New York lawsuit deprives Democrats of "their most critical gerrymander of the 2022 cycle," wrote Dave Wasserman, redistricting analyst with the Cook Political Report, on Twitter.

The seven Court of Appeals judges not only were sharply divided on their decision, but used harsh words to criticize opposing views — "nonsensical," for one example.

The court is composed of six Democrats and one Republican but, under Chief Judge Janet DiFiore, it has been a conservative court in many ways, especially on criminal matters. And when it came to voting on redistricting, the court's conservative bloc stuck together: DiFiore, Republican Michael Garcia, Anthony Cannataro and Madeline Singas (former Nassau County prosecutor).

The majority said the Democratic-led legislature failed to follow proper procedure, along with skewing districts in their favor.

As for procedure, voters in 2014 approved an amendment calling for new maps to be drawn by a bipartisan commission. Earlier this year, that body, made up of five Democrats and five Republicans, couldn't agree on one set of maps — a stalemate that critics, who called the commission fatally flawed, had long predicted. 

The legislature voted down the commission's first set of maps. When the commission couldn't even come up with a second set, the legislature stepped in and created its own maps. But the failure to review a second set of maps meant legislators violated the process, the court ruled. 

Further, DiFiore, writing for the majority, said there was clear evidence of gerrymandering and intent to avoid electoral competition.

"There is record support in the undisputed facts and evidence presented by petitioners for the affirmed finding that the 2022 congressional map was drawn to discourage competition," DiFiore wrote. "Indeed, several of the state respondents’ experts, who urged the court to draw the contrary inference, concededly did not take into account the reduction in competitive districts."

In dissent were the court's two most liberal judges, Jenny Rivera and Rowan Wilson, joined by the newest judge, Shirley Troutman.

The dissenters said Republican litigants failed to produce sufficient detailed evidence to prove the new maps were gerrymandered. They also said the fact that the redistricting produced one pair of maps and not two wasn't sufficient cause for taking the power away from the legislature. 

Rivera wrote: "The legislature acted within its authority by adopting the redistricting legislation challenged here after the Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC) chose not to submit a redistricting plan by the second constitutional deadline. … There is no procedural error of constitutional magnitude warranting invalidation of the legislature’s redistricting implementing legislation." 

The judge also warned that in the future, with this ruling, one political party might sabotage the commission redistricting process easily by simply refusing to participate and waiting for the courts to take over. 

By Yancey Roy

yancey.roy@newsday.com@yanceyroy