[EL] How Democrats are ‘unilaterally disarming’ in the redistricting wars [not doing that in Oregon]

[Dan Meek]

There is not an even number of Rs and Ds on the Oregon Senate Redistricting Committee.  It is 3 Ds and 
2 Rs.  And it does not matter how many Ds or Rs are on the committees, due to the "withdrawal" rule I 
explained in my previous response.  No committee can bottle up a bill in a committee at the Oregon 
Legislature.  All bills in committees are subject to immediate withdrawal to the floor of either 
chamber, upon a majority vote in that chamber.

Also, the Democrats in the Oregon Legislature succeeded in obtaining a ruling by the Oregon Supreme 
Court that extended the time for performing the redistricting function.  They will have the time.  The 
Secretary of State has no role, unless the Oregon Legislature fails to adopt maps within the ample 
time now available.  The Oregon Supreme Court has no role other than to review the adopted maps for 
compliance with "all law applicable thereto."  What the Oregon Legislature does is itself "law 
applicable thereto."  If the Court rejects the maps, then mapping reverts to the Secretary of State, 
whose work is again subject to Oregon Supreme Court review for compliance with law only.

The Oregon Supreme Court consists of 7 justices, all of whom were appointed by Democratic Governors.

Dan Meek ⚖

	503-293-9021 	dan at meek.net <mailto:dan at meek.net>	855-280-0488 fax



On 6/21/2021 5:12 PM, Stephanie F Singer wrote:
> It may also be relevant that if the legislature’s redistricting process is not final in time, the 
> control can pass elsewhere. I’m not an expert on this, but I believe that it goes to the Secretary 
> of State (currently a Democrat), and that the State Supreme Court can play a role. An even number of 
> Rs and Ds on the legislature’s committee might result in a failure to pass a plan.
>
> https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors188.html
>
>> On Jun 21, 2021, at 4:27 PM, Dan Meek <dan at meek.net> wrote:
>>
>> Oregon has not created an independent redistricting commission of any sort.
>>
>> Also, the Politico story is wrong about Democrats in the Oregon Legislature giving up their power 
>> to redistrict their own seats and congressional seats.  They did not do that.  They only added one 
>> Republican to the House Redistricting Committee, making it evenly balanced D/R.  The Oregon Senate 
>> Committee remains with a 3-2 D majority.  But neither of those committees has veto power over 
>> adoption of new districts by the large D majorities in both chambers.
>>
>> Both chambers have a "withdrawal" rule that allows any member to move to bring any bill to the 
>> floor for an immediate and final vote.  The motion to withdraw is not debatable and succeeds on a 
>> majority vote on the floor.  If the motion succeeds, the bill is immediately put to a vote on the 
>> floor and also succeeds on a majority vote.
>>
>> The Oregon House is 37 Ds v. 23 Rs.  The Oregon Senate is 18 Ds v. 10 Rs v. 2 Independent Party 
>> members who vote with the Rs.  The Rs cannot bottle up a Democratic redistricting bill in the House 
>> Redistricting Committee, due to the "withdrawal" process.
>>
>> Dan Meek ⚖
>>
>> 	503-293-9021 	dan at meek.net <mailto:dan at meek.net> 	855-280-0488 fax
>>
>>
>> On 6/21/2021 2:12 PM, Pildes, Rick wrote:
>>> I have a question about the recent Politico story with that title.  I’m inclined to think it’s 
>>> misleading.
>>> From my recollection, in most of these examples, it is not Democratic legislatures that have 
>>> created these independent commissions.  It is voters, through voter initiatives, that have created 
>>> them.  As far as I can recall, the only two states in which Democratic legislatures did this are 
>>> VA and OR.  In VA, that was because Democrats campaigned throughout the decade against the 
>>> Republican gerrymander and insisted on a commission; once they got in power, most Democrats tried 
>>> to walk away from their prior commitment, but just enough of them felt obligated to stick with 
>>> that commitment, and so, with a lot of Republican votes, the commission was adopted.  The 
>>> situation in OR, which is unique, does fit the claim of the piece.  But it seems to me more wrong 
>>> than right to claim that Democratic legislatures are voluntarily giving up the power to redistrict 
>>> where they have it.
>>> Let me know if I’m missing parts of the larger picture.
>>> Best,
>>> Rick
>>> Richard H. Pildes
>>> Sudler Family Professor of Constitutional Law
>>> NYU School of Law
>>> 347-886-6789
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Law-election mailing list
>>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>>> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu <mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
>> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20210621/cde8f96f/attachment.html>