The timing is crucial because Ohio needs legislative maps by Wednesday to hold primaries on Aug. 2 – the latest possible date, according to state election officials. But in its 4-3 ruling, the Supreme Court rejected the case, saying the qualifiers could be held later than August 2 and the map could be completed by 9 p.m. of 6 May – the new court deadline. “The so-called ‘deadline’ of April 20 for implementing a draft General Assembly-district seems to be an artificial deadline based on a speculative, possible date for state legislative races,” according to the majority, which did not mention an author. If the Ohio Restructuring Commission fails to find a solution, the task could be outsourced to a trio of federal judges. The Ohio Supreme Court also rejected a request to keep members of the Ohio Redistribution Commission in contempt of court. Democratic groups and voting groups suing for the maps had asked the court to punish the commission, or some of its members, for failing to approve a constitutional charter.
What did the court order?
The majority of the court suggested that the Ohio Restructuring Commission start with maps created by two salaried cartographers – Michael McDonald, a professor of political science at the University of Florida, and Douglas Johnson, president of National Demographs Corp. “With some measures, their plan – although incomplete – is well on its way to being constitutional,” according to the majority. The salaried cartographer plan had fewer overthrows on both sides of the political corridor than those approved by Republicans in the committee. The majority of the court has set a premium on maps that exactly match the voting preferences of Ohioans – about 54% for Republican candidates and 46% for Democrats – and too many districts for a political party. Three Republican judges disagreed with the court ruling, saying the court – not members of the Republican Party in the Commission – had thrown the Ohio election into chaos. “We are stuck in a time loop, like the characters in ‘Groundhog Day,’” wrote Judge Sharon Kennedy, a Republican who is seeking supreme justice. “The film, of course, was comic entertainment, but the outcome of these cases is anything but for the people of this state.”
Why were the maps rejected?
The maps now rejected were the result of designs by GOP cartographers previously rejected by the Ohio Supreme Court. The fourth version reduced the number of highly competitive seats for Democrats, but there were no similarly competitive seats for Republican candidates. Four Republicans in the Ohio Restructuring Commission approved the maps March 28. GOP controller Keith Faber and two Democrats on their committee voted against, albeit for different reasons. Without the support of Democrats, the maps would have lasted four years. “Although the committee appeared to be involved in a more collaborative process of drafting a legislative charter, the last day before the approval of the third revised draft revealed anything other than that,” the majority wrote. The majority of the court pointed out that the focus of Senate President Matt Huffman on the protection of incumbent lawmakers was slowing down the creation of maps.
Democratic Party Judges: ‘Fraudulent Majority’ Exercises Power
Judge Patrick Fisher, a Republican, said a majority opinion does not follow the Ohio Constitution and eliminates the incentive for compromises for Democrats. If the majority of the four justices had not ignored the constitutional text, Ohio would have had a district plan months ago and would not have had problems setting election dates, constitutional crisis or threatening a federal court, he said. “The views of the majority in these cases continue to hurt this court, the Ohio Constitution and all the citizens of this great state. “These views have set this state on an unconstitutional path,” Fischer wrote. He added that federal court action may be needed to correct it. Judge Patrick DeWine, a Republican, used a harsher tone, saying “the rogue majority is just exercising brutal political power.” He said the majority were simply compiling charter requirements that did not exist in the state constitution. Efforts to meet those symmetry requirements have led to maps separating cities like slices of pizza, he said. “If it is really true that history repeats itself, first as a tragedy and then as a farce, we are now comfortable in the stage of farce,” DeWine concluded. “The fourth draft adopted is in line with all constitutional standards.”
What happens next?
Ohioans may not have seen the last of these rejected legislative maps. Three federal judges are tasked with setting a qualifying date and selecting maps if Ohio leaders cannot do so before April 20. The trio of judges may have to choose between a variety of options, including the use of maps rejected by the Ohio Supreme Court, the preservation of maps used over the past decade, or the selection of new maps such as those created by the two salaried cartographers. Not so fast, the majority of the Ohio Supreme Court wrote on Thursday. “Any suggestion that the federal court could – much more than it should – set a date for the August 2 primaries as a redress in federal court seems to us a dubious proposition at best.” Early voting in the May 3 by-elections is already under way without candidates for Parliament and the Senate on the ballot. Ohioans will vote for candidates across the state, including the U.S. Senate and Gov., congressional nominees and local tribes. The Statehouse games will be played later. Read the decision: Jessie Balmert is a reporter for the USA TODAY Network Ohio Bureau, which serves the Akron Beacon Journal, the Cincinnati Inquirer, the Columbus Dispatch, and 18 other affiliated news organizations throughout Ohio.
