Visual legal news and reports.
Supreme Court Coverage
Explaining each case in an infographic.
The Supreme Court disappoints on political gerrymandering.
June 18, 2018
One of the biggest issues before the Supreme Court this term was political gerrymandering. Court followers anxiously awaited decisions in Gill v. Whitford and Benisek v. Lamone, both of which could have told the nation when political influence in districting goes too far.
Since 2004 the Court has been unwilling to step in because the Justices were unable to articulate the standard. Court followers hoped that the Court's acceptance of two political gerrymandering cases this term indicated it was willing to take another stab.
But the Court didn't seize the opportunity. Each of the cases allowed the Justices to resolve its issues before the Court had to consider the big question.
Gill v. Whitford was a case out of Wisconsin. Democrats claimed Republican authorities drew the state's voting district lines to an unfair Republican advantage.
Benisek v. Lamone came out of Maryland. Republicans claimed Maryland Democrats "dismantled" one of the Congressional districts through the redistricting process so the Democrats would control the vote.
View the reports to see how the Court avoided the main political gerrymandering question in each.