Election Law Society

Ohio: Will Redistricting Remove Its “Swing State” Status?

Election Law Society · March 4, 2022 ·

By: Jayde Morgan

With the exception of the last few years, Ohio had always seemed to fall firmly into the category of a “swing-state.” In 2016, it was seen as a vital state for either candidate to claim victory over. However, since 2016, Ohio has come to be seen as a firmly Republican-held state. Some have gone so far as to claim that Ohio should no longer be on the roster of states that Presidential candidates should visit and attempt to win. This is a marked change from 2012 when former President Barack Obama won 50.1% of the vote and United States Senator Sherrod Brown won 50.3% of the vote.

At that time, the Ohio government was divided with a Republican governor, one Republican Senator, one Democratic senator, a Republican House of Representatives, a Republican State Senate and State House of Representatives, but ultimately voted for Democrat, Barack Obama in the presidential election. Comparatively, Republican President Donald Trump received 53.3% of the votes in the 2020 election and Republicans gained a supermajority in the House of Representatives.

With Ohio becoming a staunchly conservative state, it seems inevitable that redistricting would reflect this trend. The Brennan Center recently filed a lawsuit to force the Ohio Redistricting Commission to redraw maps that they claim are “a master class in how to achieve a one-party state” or, in other words, the result of an effort to further solidify the Republican supermajority in the once “purple” state. The lawsuit was filed on Monday, September 27, 2021 and focuses on the alleged violation of equal protection and associational rights and the prohibition of partisan gerrymandering. Though gerrymandering is not a new concept in Ohio, many were outraged that the alleged extreme partisan gerrymandering came on the heels of a 2015 constitutional amendment that was specifically created to reduce partisan gerrymandering.

Ranked Choice Voting: Andrew Yang’s Forward Party Platform Initiative

Election Law Society · March 2, 2022 ·

By: Sylvanna Gross

The night “plunged into chaos” when the New York City Board of Elections published, and then immediately removed, the vote tabulations for the next NYC mayor in June, 2021. It was the first time the city implemented ranked-choice voting after a ballot question proposing the shift was approved in 2019. Interestingly, the candidate who eventually won, Eric Adams, opposed the ballot proposition. He predicted the path to his eventual success when he stated, “I am concerned that not enough … has been done … to ensure a smooth transition.”

Voting Rights for People with Felony Conviction Histories in Question in North Carolina

Election Law Society · February 28, 2022 ·

By: Emma Postel

On September 3, 2021, the North Carolina Court of Appeals stayed an order from the North Carolina state Superior Court, preventing 56,000 North Carolinians with felony conviction histories from registering to vote. This Court of Appeals order reinstates the voting restrictions established by law in 1973, preventing the affected North Carolinians still under state supervision from registering to vote, and as a result, prevents them from voting in the upcoming fall municipal elections.

The decision was “immediately appealed” by the plaintiffs, who maintained that the “exclusion of our neighbors’ voices is morally and constitutionally wrong.” On the other hand, the defendants in this case believe this reversal is good news, stating that the now overruled Superior Court order was a judicial overreach, essentially amounting to “judges…replac[ing] laws they don’t like with new ones.” North Carolina Republican State Senators further questioned the Superior Court’s discretion, suggesting “[i]f a judge prefers a different path to regaining those rights, then he or she should run for the General Assembly and propose that path.”

Audit Finds Wisconsin 2020 Elections Were “Safe and Secure” – What Comes Next?

Election Law Society · February 25, 2022 ·

By: Kayla Burris

The 2020 presidential election was a test of Wisconsin’s election system. Like other states, Wisconsin faced numerous legal challenges to the ways votes were cast and counted. However, as a battleground state in a tight race, calls of fraud were particularly loud. Wisconsin also conducted a recount in two of its counties and Republican groups continued calling for audits long after Biden was sworn into office.

The Republican-controlled legislature agreed that the fraud claims had merit and, voting along party lines, ordered an audit to “be conducted by the nonpartisan Legislative Audit Bureau.” Democrats were largely opposed to the audit, with Democratic Governor Tony Evers accusing Republican leaders of “drinking the Kool-Aid” and pushing baseless conspiracy theories about the election.

2021 Redistricting in Indiana: Solidifying Incumbent Protection

Election Law Society · February 23, 2022 ·

On Monday, October 4, Governor Eric Holcomb signed into law the proposed 2021 redistricting maps for the State of Indiana. In a prepared statement, Holcomb thanked “both the House and Senate for faithfully following through in an orderly and transparent way,” adding “a special thanks to every Hoosier who participated in the process by sharing their local perspective and input.” Critics reacted very differently, decrying both the process—as rushed and secretive—and the result—an unfair dilution of minority and urban voter strength. Ultimately, whatever the validity of either of these statements, the 2021 maps do ensure one thing: solid incumbent protection and a continued advantage to the current party in power in the Indianapolis statehouse. The following considers the process that played out in Indiana, the criticisms leveled against this process, and its likely results.

Like past iterations of redistricting, the 2021 redistricting process in Indiana could not get underway without data from the U.S. Census Bureau. But as it has affected so many other instances of life in the United States, the COVID-19 pandemic caused snags, resulting in a census data delay of more than four months—data that was expected to be released in March ended up with a release date in early August. In a series of five redistricting hearings, held in select locations throughout the state from August 6th to August 11th, stakeholders, voting activists, and interested members of the public disagreed on what should occur as a result of the census data delay. Some of those testifying argued the redistricting process must be slowed down to permit the public an opportunity to review proposed maps and voice their concerns—after all, they would be drawn in just about one month, publicly released, and then go to a vote soon after. Instead, Indiana Republicans noted their intention to quickly advance the maps once they obtained the data, raising their own concerns that further delays could cause problems for county officials preparing for the 2022 election.