The epoch times

New Mexico Democrat-Led Legislature’s Gerrymander Ruling Upheld

A ⁣Victory for New Mexico ‍Democrats: Judge Upholds Congressional Map

A⁣ New​ Mexico‌ 9th Judicial District judge has⁢ upheld the state’s post-2020 Census reapportionment, dismissing ⁤claims by⁤ the Republican Party of New Mexico that the Democrat-led state ‌legislature’s congressional map is ⁤a “racial gerrymander” that⁤ violates the ​state’s Constitution.

The 14-page ruling issued Oct. 6 will be ‍challenged by ⁤the state’s GOP, but‌ it ⁢virtually ensures New Mexico’s three‍ congressional districts—all represented⁣ by Democrats—will remain ⁤as they are⁣ for the 2024 elections.

The New⁢ Mexico congressional ⁤map lawsuit is one of at least a ⁣dozen underway in state and federal‍ courts across the country,⁤ including a South Carolina case, Alexander v.‌ South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, to be heard before the ⁣United States Supreme Court on Oct. 11.

Related Stories

How‌ and where those court ⁣decisions shake⁢ out could have ⁤significant repercussions in Congress, potentially making it structurally more difficult for Republicans to expand or ⁤sustain their current 222–212 U.S. House majority in 2024’s‌ elections.

The New Mexico​ decision ⁢follows an Oct. 5 ruling by a three-judge ⁤U.S. Northern District of Alabama panel​ that creates a new Alabama congressional⁤ map containing one majority-black district ⁣and another ⁢near-black-majority district presumptively​ favoring Democrats. Right now, the state’s seven-member‍ congressional delegation consists⁤ of six Republicans and one ‌Democrat.

Alabama’s ⁢new map will also likely be in place for the 2024 elections,⁤ even if state GOP officials continue challenging​ Allen v. Milligan, which the United States Supreme Court⁢ voted 5–4⁤ on ⁢June 8 to kick back to the same circuit court panel that initially rejected the map and issued the Oct. 5 ruling.

The Republican Party‍ of New Mexico, state Sen. David ‍Gallegos ⁣(R-Eunice), several individual voters, and Roswell Mayor Timothy Jennings, a former⁢ Democrat state‌ senator ‍still registered with the party,‍ filed the lawsuit, Republican Party ⁣of N.M. v. Toulouse ‌Oliver, on Jan. 21, ⁤2022.

The complaint alleged the ⁣congressional map redrawn by the state ‍legislature during⁢ a 2021 special session and signed into⁤ law by Democrat⁣ Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham was​ done “in contravention of traditional‍ redistricting principles … to accomplish a political gerrymander that⁣ unconstitutionally dilutes the votes of residents of southeastern New Mexico in ⁢order to achieve partisan advantage.”

The suit ⁣was filed in Clovis, where‌ a state district court​ judge determined plaintiffs had “a strong, well-developed case​ that [the 2021 map] is an unlawful political gerrymander that ​dilutes Republican ⁣votes in congressional races in New Mexico.”

The state appealed‍ to the​ New Mexico Supreme Court. In July, ⁣it ruled the lawsuit was “justiciable”—justified—under state ⁤law and sent the​ case back to ‌the state 9th Judicial⁤ District Court and Judge‍ Fred Van Soelen.

The⁣ Supreme Court gave the⁣ state circuit ​court an⁣ Oct. 1 deadline to ⁣issue its ruling. It extended‍ that deadline to​ Oct. 6 following a Sept. 27–28 trial.

Attorneys for ⁤the state’s⁣ GOP argued the‍ Democratic-led Legislature​ intentionally diluted Republican votes in the state’s Congressional ⁢District 2‍ (CD2), which had “leaned Republican.”

Plaintiffs​ presented emails between Democrat officials that showed they reapportioned the⁣ state’s three congressional districts to ensure a “balancing” of districts, each with 53 percent ⁢or above of‍ registered⁢ Democrat voters.

New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham listens to President Joe Biden’s speech about student​ debt relief at Central New ⁢Mexico Community College Student ⁢Resource Center in⁢ Albuquerque,‌ N.M., on Nov. 3, 2022. (Saul Loeb/AFP ⁤via Getty Images)

GOP: Gerrymander Led ⁣to⁢ Flip

In the 2022 midterms, Rep. Gabe ‍Vasquez (D-N.M.) unseated Republican incumbent Yvette​ Herrell by 50.32 percent ​to 49.68 percent, less than 1,500 votes.

In the ruling,​ Judge Van Soelen wrote that ‌“objective evidence ⁢presented shows the resulting dilution of‌ the plaintiffs’ vote was substantial”‍ but not enough of⁣ “an egregious partisan gerrymander” ‌to be unconstitutional​ under state law.

“Some degree⁣ of ‍a‍ partisan gerrymander is permissible,” he wrote. “It‍ is ⁣only ‍when partisan⁤ gerrymanders are⁢ ‘egregious’ that Constitutional ‌protections ‍are indicated.”

The judge determined the‌ contested redistricting met the state’s ‌ test ​ for preventing an “egregious partisan ​gerrymander” and plaintiffs did not prove “the disparate treatment of vote dilution rises to‍ the level of an egregious gerrymander.”

While⁢ the ‌Legislature intended ​to “entrench their party in [CD 2],⁣ and they succeeded in⁢ substantially ‍diluting ⁤their‌ opponents’ votes,” given “variables ‍that go into predicting future election outcomes, coupled with the⁤ competitive outcome of the only actual election ​held so far” under the ‍map, plaintiffs⁤ did not provide evidence to show that the‍ defendants ⁣were “successful in their attempt to entrench their party in Congressional District 2,” ⁢he ⁢wrote.

The ‍Republican Party of New Mexico Chairman and former U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce said in⁤ a statement that the ruling is “bigger than Republican or Democrat.⁣ It struck at the heart of our Republic, the form of government that​ allows all beliefs to have a voice.”

Mr.⁣ Pearce said ‍Judge Van Soelen acknowledged CD⁤ 2’s ​partisan ‍gerrymandering‍ but somehow decided⁢ a shift “18 points⁣ in favor of Democrats” ‌was not “egregious enough.”

“The gerrymandered districts disenfranchise ​the votes‍ of all conservative⁤ voters: Hispanic,​ Native American,​ Black, and all other pro-family, pro-parent,⁢ pro-gun, ​pro-life voters, farmers, and oil and gas workers,” he said. “Democrat, Republican, and Independents ⁤alike have‌ lost their voice.⁤ New ⁢Mexico’s primary industry is undermined, ‌and jobs are at stake.”

The state’s Republican⁢ Party “believes the fight is too important ‌to accept this setback without contest,” Mr. Pearce said. “On behalf ‌of⁢ all disenfranchised voters in the state of New Mexico, [the state GOP] will be ‌appealing our case to the New Mexico Supreme ​Court.”

What claims were made by the ⁣Republican Party⁤ of New ⁣Mexico regarding​ the⁤ post-2020 Census reapportionment in the ⁤state?

A Victory for New Mexico Democrats: Judge Upholds Congressional Map

In a significant ‌victory for the Democratic Party in New Mexico, a ⁤9th Judicial⁢ District ⁣judge has‍ upheld ⁢the state’s​ post-2020 Census reapportionment. The ruling dismisses ⁣claims made by the Republican Party of​ New Mexico that the congressional‌ map created by the Democrat-led state legislature is a ​”racial gerrymander” and therefore ⁢violates⁢ the state’s Constitution.

The 14-page ruling, ⁢issued on October‌ 6, is ​expected to be challenged by the state’s‌ GOP. However,‍ it​ virtually⁣ ensures that New Mexico’s three congressional ⁣districts, all currently ‍represented by Democrats, will remain unchanged for the ‍2024 elections.

The New Mexico congressional⁤ map lawsuit is just one of many similar cases⁤ currently taking place⁢ in state and federal courts across the country. These‍ cases ⁢involve allegations ​of ⁤racial gerrymandering and its impact on the integrity⁢ of congressional districts. ⁣One such case, Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, ‌is​ scheduled to be ⁢heard ‌before the United States Supreme Court on ‌October 11.

The outcome of these ⁣court decisions will have significant implications for the composition of ‍Congress, potentially making it more difficult for Republicans⁤ to expand or maintain their current 222–212 majority ‌in⁣ the‌ U.S. House of⁢ Representatives during the 2024 elections.

The recent ruling in New Mexico follows another notable decision made on October ⁢5 by a three-judge​ panel of the U.S. Northern District of Alabama. This ruling resulted in the creation of a⁣ new Alabama congressional⁣ map that includes one ⁣majority-black‌ district and another⁢ near-black-majority ‌district, ‌which is presumed to favor Democrats. Currently, Alabama’s congressional delegation ‍consists ‍of six Republicans and‌ one Democrat.

It is ​anticipated that Alabama’s new map will also be in ​place for the ⁢2024 elections, despite possible challenges by state GOP officials. The Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Allen v. Milligan further‌ supports the⁤ validity of​ the new map.

These rulings highlight⁣ the ongoing battle over the redrawing of congressional districts and the potential impact on political representation. As these cases continue​ to unfold, their ​outcomes will shape the future ⁣of ‌Congress and have lasting effects on the balance of ‌power ‍between ‌Democrats and Republicans.



" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

Related Articles

Sponsored Content
Back to top button
Available for Amazon Prime
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker