Black Lives Matter.
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer

NC Council of Churches

Strength in Unity, Peace through Justice

  • Voices
  • About
    • Overview
    • Staff
    • Members
    • Covenant Partners
    • Issue Statements
    • Governing Board
  • Programs
    • Ecumenical Immigration Alliance
      • Ideas for Action
      • Sign Our Statement
      • The NC Sanctuary Coalition
      • Immigration Bible Study
      • Contact
    • NC Interfaith Power & Light
      • NCIPL Overview
      • Faith in Action NCIPL
      • NCIPL Articles
      • NCIPL Resources
      • Upcoming Events for NCIPL
      • Contact NCIPL
    • Partners in Health & Wholeness
      • PHW Staff
      • Mini-Grants
      • PHW Collaborative Pledge
      • The Overdose Crisis: The Faith Community Responds
      • PHW Articles
      • FAQs
  • Priorities
    • Racial Justice
    • The Overdose Crisis: The Faith Community Responds
    • Gun Violence Prevention
    • Public Education
    • NC Sanctuary Coalition
    • Farmworkers
    • Legislative Advocacy
    • Christian Unity
    • Peace
    • NC No Torture
  • COVID-19 Resources
  • Events
  • Resources
    • Publications & Reports
    • Raleigh Report
    • Lectionary
    • Sermons
  • Donate
  • Council Store
  • Show Search

Search NC Council of Churches

Hide Search

Race, Courts and Twisted Districts

Steve Ford, Volunteer Program Associate · January 9, 2016 · 1 Comment

Click here to sign up to receive the Raleigh Report in your inbox

Few of the decisions made by the men and women of our General Assembly are so prone to self-serving, partisan abuse as the setting of boundaries for voting districts. When legislators yield to that temptation, it’s inescapable that the rights of some voters to have a fair, equal voice in elections are trampled into the dirt.

We are now into the third decade of high-stakes legal battles over the constitutionality of North Carolina’s periodic exercises in what’s known as redistricting. If the U.S. Supreme Court were the parents of unruly children rough-housing in the basement, it would be long past the time when the warning went out: “Don’t make us come down there!” But this year may provide the moment when those fed-up “parents” go clomping down the stairs.

The shape of voting districts is a sensitive, consequential issue because it plays such a big role in determining who gets elected to our representative bodies of government, and thus who has the inside track in passing laws and setting policies.

In North Carolina, the Republican Party has held that inside track ever since its victories in the 2010 elections – as part of a national pushback against first-term President Obama – gave it the power to reconfigure legislative and congressional districts in keeping with that year’s census.

The party’s legislative leaders undertook an aggressive district remapping calculated to boost its candidates while marginalizing Democrats. The strategy worked. In 2012 and 2014, Republicans captured large majorities in the legislature and the state’s congressional delegation, even in the face of healthy Democratic vote totals.

Democratic politicians, playing their own brand of hardball, had used some of the same tricks when they had the chance. This time, however, the Republicans faced an inconvenient truth: Many of the Democratic voters whose voices were being muffled were African-American. And under the nation’s hard-won civil rights laws, racial minorities are supposed to be protected from measures that would deprive them of a fair say at the polls.

Supreme scrutiny

So the redistricting chiefs found themselves in court, answering lawsuits filed by civil rights and social justice advocates. The essence of the complaint was that many black voters had been packed into a relatively small number of painstakingly drawn districts – thereby purging the surrounding districts of voters who tend to support Democrats.

Yes, the predominantly black districts would likely elect black candidates. But African-Americans’ overall influence would be diminished as Republicans, typically white conservatives, rolled up victory after victory in the larger number of districts that remained.

A panel of three state trial judges was the first to consider the challenges. It found no fault with the redistricting scheme. In late 2014 the state Supreme Court agreed. The court’s Republican-majority makeup made the ruling somewhat less than a surprise, although a dissent by Democratic justices signaled that the plaintiffs had scored important points.

Along came the U.S. Supreme Court, which has had to sort out several North Carolina redistricting puzzles. In April of last year, the high court told the state Supremes to take another look at the case. This was on the heels of a ruling to the effect that a similar Republican-engineered redistricting plan in Alabama amounted to an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

The court in Raleigh went back to work, after its fashion. It heard another round of arguments in August. The decision came on Dec. 18, in an opinion written by Justice Paul Newby and joined by his three Republican colleagues. There was nothing amiss with his court’s previous ruling, Newby concluded, and the Alabama case wasn’t a problem. He might as well have told the nation’s top court to take a hike.

In dissent, Justice Cheri Beasley (a Democrat) argued that the state Supreme Court should have taken the cue from Washington and explored the issue more thoroughly. The three-judge panel that originally signed off on the current districts should have been told to intensify its fact-finding, Beasley wrote, and should have been given a chance to “get it right” in light of the Alabama decision.

In particular, she said, the panel should have been instructed to drill more deeply into the role that race played in the drawing of several districts tagged by plaintiffs as having been impermissibly packed with black voters.

If race indeed was a predominant factor in deciding which voters would be included in those districts, Beasley asserted, then the legislators who drew the maps should have had to meet the high legal standard that the Supreme Court has said must accompany race-based classifications if they are to pass constitutional muster. The redistricting plans would have to be “narrowly tailored” to achieve a compelling public interest. Beasley, in her opinion joined by Democratic justices Robin Hudson and Sam Ervin IV, didn’t hide her skepticism as to whether the plans met that standard.

21 and counting

The Republican-drawn maps relied heavily on two approaches that ended up concentrating black voters in a limited number of districts. First, they created districts in which African-American voters were in the majority – at least half of the voters, plus one. Second, they aimed to draw districts in such a way that the number of black office-holders would be proportionate to the black voter population, which stands at about 21 percent of the state’s total.

The rationale – and a cynical one it was – is that the state thus could defend itself against any challenges brought under the federal Civil Rights Act that it had not given black citizens a fair chance to elect candidates of their choice.

Plaintiffs in the current lawsuit, including the state chapters of the NAACP and the League of Women Voters, would say that a redistricting plan under which African-Americans are expected to win 21 percent of the available seats while they lose influence in other, far more numerous districts amounts to winning the battle while losing the war.

When their appeal goes back to the Supreme Court in Washington, they’ll understandably hope that Justice Stephen Breyer and his four colleagues who last year threw out the Alabama redistricting scheme will side with Cheri Beasley in finding North Carolina’s response to the Alabama ruling to have been inadequate.

Rightward ho

When one party or the other skews districts to its advantage, the consequences can be profound. In North Carolina the Republican Party has been able to lock in an overwhelming legislative majority for the last three years.

That period has seen a dramatic shift toward the right across a range of policies, including budgets and taxes, business regulation and higher education. Many legislators will reclaim their seats in the election next fall without an opponent because running against an incumbent in a gerrymandered district is seen as an impossible task.

It falls to the courts to decide whether legislators, in their redistricting process, have been carried away by partisan zeal to the point where some voters’ rights have been violated.

No wonder, then, that seats on the state Supreme Court are now so vigorously contested, with ideologically driven interest groups spending unprecedented sums to boost candidates whom they see as being in sync with their views.

Judges of course are supposed to follow the law, not their own policy preferences. But it was telling when, in 2012, Republican groups propelled Newby to victory on the strength of an expensive burst of late-campaign TV ads. His win meant a Republican majority on the court.

The party’s legislative agenda is almost guaranteed to provoke legal challenges that are destined for review by the state’s highest court. Not surprisingly, more money is being spent to influence judicial elections. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, North Carolina’s 2014 judicial campaigns were the second-most expensive in the country. The flow of money came after the legislature scrapped North Carolina’s cutting-edge system of public campaign financing for seats on the appellate courts. Obviously, the thinking was that Republican candidates for judgeships would benefit.

The Supreme Court’s partisan divide today is 4-3, Republicans over Democrats. It perhaps has to be taken as a given that some rulings will comport with justices’ ideology as they view the law through that lens.

But it should be troubling when we see Republican legislators enacting laws that then are routinely upheld by Republican-controlled courts, whose members owe their election in considerable degree to campaign funders aligned with the party.

It’s even more troubling when those laws are enacted in pursuit of an agenda that favors the wealthy, the well-connected and the privileged at the expense of ordinary people trying to improve their lives and the lives of their children. The Council of Churches joins those who look to the U.S. Supreme Court to throw the brakes on a redistricting process that lies at the heart of this misapplication of partisan power.

Filed Under: Blog, Homepage Featured, Raleigh Report Tagged With: Elections, Good Government, N.C. General Assembly, Race/Ethnicity

Steve Ford, Volunteer Program Associate

About Steve Ford, Volunteer Program Associate

Much goes on in North Carolina's state capital that's important to the Council of Churches. I'm glad to have a chance to help follow the action, transitioning from my career with The News & Observer of Raleigh, where I retired in 2012 as editorial page editor. I'm originally from Virginia but have lived in Cary so long I remember the Kildaire Farm barn.

Read more of my commentary here.

Reader Interactions

More Like This

Election Machinery in High Gear
Churches’ Watchwords: Every Vote Counts!
Raleigh Report – March 25, 2019

Comments

  1. AvatarMac Hulslander says

    January 12, 2016 at 10:17 am

    Want to commend Steve for his crisp elucidation of the gerrymandering
    issue and its impact on our democracy. Certainly the biblical understanding
    that “all have sinned” applies when it comes to using gerrymandering as a methodology
    of disenfranchisement but never have we witnessed the excesses to which we
    are now subjected. Hopefully a Supreme Court ruling and the establishment
    of a non-partisan re-districting commission will offer a way forward.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Anonymous comments or comments that target individuals will not be posted (please include your first and last name). All comments must be on topic and respectful. Comments will not be posted until they have been reviewed by a moderator. Comments do not reflect the positions of the NC Council of Churches.

Footer

Contact

NC Council of Churches
27 Horne St.
Raleigh, NC 27607
(919) 828-6501
info@ncchurches.org

Facebook

Partners in Health and Wholeness

Featured

Race, Courts and Twisted Districts

Latest Tweets

Moving away from fossil fuels is vital to loving our neighbor! Say so during the public hearing on the @DukeEnergy IRP on March 16th. Register today: dukesenergyplan.org/… pic.twitter.com/FD9u…

About 2 days ago

The #ForThePeopleAct (#HR1) just passed in the #House! We are one step closer to: ✅ Protect the freedom to vote ✅ Ensure the integrity of our elections ✅ Hold elected officials accountable ✅ End the era of big money in our politics pic.twitter.com/Mkhb…

About 2 days ago

"One day when the glory comes It will be ours, it will be ours" - John Legend, "Glory" Read our resolution at the link >> ncchurches.org/2021/… pic.twitter.com/y9Vs…

About 2 days ago

"Our knowing that divine reality exists gives us permission to be humble, gentle, and kind." Read more from Susannah Tuttle and her reflection for the third Sunday in Lent. >> ncchurches.org/2021/… pic.twitter.com/cEzo…

About 3 days ago

Read or listen to this article from @PNS_News about a new data dashboard in North Carolina that would help local county officials better allocate vaccines to where they're needed most. Follow the link to find out more >> publicnewsservice.or…

About 3 days ago

Follow @ncchurches

Latest Tweets

Glad to be on this journey with you! Another workweek in the books and another reason to be proud 💪 twitter.com/StampSti…

About a day ago

#harmreduction is love. twitter.com/HarmRedu…

About 3 days ago

RT @WakeMed Today marks one year since our state’s first #COVID19 case. #WakeMed staff, visitors and patients observed a #momentofsilence to honor the legacy of those we've lost and reflect on the strength and compassion of every essential worker, patient and family as we begin to heal. pic.twitter.com/E92V…

About 3 days ago

Dr. Satcher questioned the structures that have upheld health disparities in our communities. By laying the foundation for this work, we can continue taking meaningful action towards promoting a society where we can all thrive. #BlackHistoryMonth @HHSGov @Surgeon_General pic.twitter.com/zrw2…

Last week

Amen! #MindfulTogether twitter.com/cornerpr…

Last week

Follow @healthandfaith

Latest Tweets

RT @CUREriver The bankruptcy filing by Brazos could destabilize the entire REC systems. The U.S. need to take action to avoid this in other places. We need to make investments in clean energy, energy efficiency, and grid modernization right now. #RuralPower ow.ly/6Erz50DMYPJ

About 2 days ago

RT @greenthechurch Be sure to read Green The Church's COO Kim Noble's op ed, "#EnvironmentalJustice in Focus this #BlackHistoryMonth", in the Texas Metro News! @Kimrenay22 #Austin #DFW #Houston #Texas #SanAntonio #EJ ow.ly/mOtw50DGQnN pic.twitter.com/IPOO…

Last week

RT @ActionAidUSA To build a truly just, equitable & sustainable world, we need to fight for a new #socialcontract. That means: ✔️ Defending democracy ✔️ Fighting for climate justice ✔️ Building equitable food systems ✔️ Supporting women’s leadership. Learn more: bit.ly/2M8xT40 pic.twitter.com/fEWv…

Last week

RT @interfaithpower IPL is proud to be a signer on this letter. The U.S. must provide bold and socially just leadership to protect our communities from the impacts of climate change, including the threats to our economy- @sbhendershot twitter.com/RealBank…

Last week

RT @interfaithpower "This is all of our country, this is our mother. It's difficult to not feel obligated to protect this land" - @DebHaalandNM with a powerful reminder of what she believes in. Her passion is exactly what we need right now; the Senate must #ConfirmHaaland! #ConfirmClimate

Last week

Follow @ncipl

Latest Tweets

Copyright © 2021 NC Council of Churches · All Rights Reserved · Website by Tomatillo Design · Hosted by WP Engine