State legislators defend redistricting decisions as fair

When Republicans assumed control of the N.C. General Assembly in 2011, they obtained one of the most coveted tools in politics — the power to draw district maps to help sustain the party’s control for the next decade.

But some legislators found themselves defending the state’s legislative and congressional maps to three N.C. Superior Court judges last week.

Multiple voters and voting rights and civil rights groups are plaintiffs in a case challenging the state constitutionality of the maps.

One contention is that the newly established voting districts divide too many counties, said Gregory Wallace, a law professor at Campbell University’s Law School.

Civil rights groups are also accusing N.C. legislators of drawing districts by race, which courts typically strike down as unconstitutional, he said.

The maps have drawn criticism from legislators, including Sen. Ellie Kinnaird, D-Orange, who said districts “shaped like amoebas” benefit Republicans.

“They’re a case of egregious gerrymandering to keep the Republicans in power for another 10 years,” Kinnaird said.

But courts have consistently allowed the process of redrawing districts to benefit partisan goals, which has been used by both parties to maintain power, Wallace said.

The federal Voting Rights Act prohibits using race as a dominant factor in determining voting districts, especially if it is designed to dilute minority votes.

The act requires that nine states with histories of racial disenfranchisement submit all of their redistricting maps for approval by the U.S. Department of Justice. In North Carolina, 40 of the state’s 100 counties must have districts approved.

Courts are less tolerant of redistricting maps that violate the act than maps motivated by partisan ambitions, Wallace said.

In November 2011, the U.S. Department of Justice approved North Carolina’s redistricting maps.

“That’s kind of tough for the plaintiffs to come in now and say the maps violate equal protection,” Wallace said. “The Justice Department’s decision doesn’t bind the court, but it makes it a higher hill for the plaintiffs to climb.”

Kareem Crayton, a law professor at UNC, said in an e-mail that the issue of race in drawing the districts could raise questions among the judges.

Using race to determine districts violates the principle of colorblindness that has been established by federal courts, he said.

“The state’s defense essentially is, ‘The maps are good enough for government work,’ and that completely fails a strict scrutiny test,” Crayton said.

Rep. David Lewis, R-Harnett, former chairman of the House redistricting committee and a defendant in the case, said in an e-mail that the defendants appreciated the opportunity to present their view of the case.

“I am confident the facts and the law are on our side.”

Contact the desk editor at state@dailytarheel.com.