[EL] STAY ISSUED in WI gerrymandering case, an hour after orders came out

Mon Jun 19 08:08:40 PDT 2017

UPDATE ON STAY: Breaking: Supreme Court to Hear WI Gerrymandering Case, Gill v. Whitford, Next Term Analysis<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=93199>
Posted on June 19, 2017 6:37 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=93199> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
[UPDATE: About an hour after the Court issued its order agreeing to hear this case, it issued a second order, on a 5-4 vote, granting a stay of the lower court order<https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner/status/876815939010007040> in this case. The four liberal Justices dissented. As I explained last night, <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=93195>
Once the Court grants a hearing, the question will be whether the Court stays a lower court order requiring the WI legislature to redistrict by November so that there will be new districts ready for 2018. WI has asked for that lower court order to be put on hold until resolution of the case at the Supreme Court, and given the likely timing of things, granting the stay would almost certainly mean the old districts would have to be used for the 2018 elections no matter what the Supreme Court does, as there would be no chance to create new districts.
The granting or denial of a stay requires the Court to weigh many factors, but one of the biggest factors is likelihood of success on the merits. In other words, granting of a stay is a good (but not necessarily great) indication that the Supreme Court would be likely to reverse. That means the stay is a good indication the partisan gerrymander finding of the lower court would be reversed.
So this stay order raises a big question mark for those who think Court will use the case to rein in partisan gerrymandering.
Why did this order not come with the Court’s regular orders agreeing to hear the case? Perhaps not all the Justices had voted on the stay by the time the Court had finalized today’s order list.]
As expected, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear<https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/061917zor_6537.pdf> Gill v. Whitford next term, with a decision expected by a year from June. (Technically the Court “postponed jurisdiction” pending a hearing on the merits, but this has to do with the nature of this coming up on appeal, rather than a cert. petition, and the open question about whether partisan gerrymandering claims are justiciable.]
This case represents the last best chance for a Court to rein in excesses of partisan gerrymandering, while Justice Kennedy, who has been the swing vote on this issue, remains on the Court.  (I’ll post more about the merits on this question soon.)
Nothing is certain, but I expect that an order one way or the other on the stay will come by the end of the term.
Also notable is that the Court did not issue any order on the North Carolina partisan gerrymandering case, a follow on to what happened in NC after the lower court found the old lines were a racial gerrymander.  That case likely will be held for resolution in light of Gill, rather than set for full argument, but you never know.
Finally, the Court denied cert. in the Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless v. Husted<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=93131> case, about private party standing to sue for violation of a certain provision of the Voting Rights Act barring officials from denying voter registration and voting to individuals because of minor errors on their voting form.
[This post has been updated.]
[hare]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D93199&title=UPDATE%20ON%20STAY%3A%20Breaking%3A%20Supreme%20Court%20to%20Hear%20WI%20Gerrymandering%20Case%2C%20Gill%20v.%20Whitford%2C%20Next%20Term%20Analysis>
Posted in redistricting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

From: Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu>
Date: Monday, June 19, 2017 at 6:45 AM
To: Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
Subject: Supreme Court will hear WI partisan gerrymandering claim

Breaking: Supreme Court to Hear WI Gerrymandering Case, Gill v. Whitford, Next Term; No Ruling Yet on Stay Motion: Analysis<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=93199>
Posted on June 19, 2017 6:37 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=93199> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
As expected, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear<https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/061917zor_6537.pdf> Gill v. Whitford next term, with a decision expected by a year from June. (Technically the Court “postponed jurisdiction” pending a hearing on the merits, but this has to do with the nature of this coming up on appeal, rather than a cert. petition, and the open question about whether partisan gerrymandering claims are justiciable.]
This case represents the last best chance for a Court to rein in excesses of partisan gerrymandering, while Justice Kennedy, who has been the swing vote on this issue, remains on the Court.  (I’ll post more about the merits on this question soon.)
What’s notable about today’s order is that it does NOT include a ruling on Wisconsin’s request to delay redrawing district lines while this case is being decided. The lower court had ordered new lines to be drawn by November and, as I explained last night, a ruling on the stay motion could tip the Court’s hand on what it is ultimately likely to do in this case.
Nothing is certain, but I expect that an order one way or the other on the stay will come by the end of the term.
Also notable is that the Court did not issue any order on the North Carolina partisan gerrymandering case, a follow on to what happened in NC after the lower court found the old lines were a racial gerrymander.  That case likely will be held for resolution in light of Gill, rather than set for full argument, but you never know.
Finally, the Court denied cert. in the Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless v. Husted<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=93131> case, about private party standing to sue for violation of a certain provision of the Voting Rights Act barring officials from denying voter registration to individuals because of minor errors on their voting form.
[This post has been updated.]
[are]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D93199&title=Breaking%3A%20Supreme%20Court%20to%20Hear%20WI%20Gerrymandering%20Case%2C%20Gill%20v.%20Whitford%2C%20Next%20Term%3B%20No%20Ruling%20Yet%20on%20Stay%20Motion%3A%20Analysis>
Posted in redistricting<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Supreme Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

--
Rick Hasen
Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
UC Irvine School of Law
401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
Irvine, CA 92697-8000
949.824.3072 - office
rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>
http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
http://electionlawblog.org<http://electionlawblog.org/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20170619/8ab8f358/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2021 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20170619/8ab8f358/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2022 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20170619/8ab8f358/attachment-0001.png>