Court backs GOP remapping in Texas
WASHINGTON – A fractured Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that states are free to redraw congressional districts at a time of their choosing, largely blessing Tom DeLay’s bitterly contested handiwork in Texas and the gains it gave Republicans.
With Justice Anthony M. Kennedy playing the role of majority maker, the court ruled the 2003 Texas plan violated the rights of Hispanics in the area around Laredo and ordered a lower court to review that part of the case.
But the justices imposed no timetable, and it was not clear whether Democrats would be able to win any changes in the Republican-drafted plan before the November elections.
Additionally, the justices rejected a claim that Texas Republicans had violated the rights of black voters by breaking up a congressional district in the area around Fort Worth.
And they ruled more broadly that the Constitution does not bar states from redrawing political lines when one party or the other senses an advantage.
“With respect to a mid-decade redistricting to change districts drawn earlier in conformance with a decennial census, the Constitution and Congress state no explicit prohibition,” Kennedy wrote.
Only two justices, John Paul Stevens and Stephen Breyer, said the mid-decade redistricting showed that the Texas lawmakers were guilty of excessive partisanship.
The rulings on the challenges to the rights of Hispanics and blacks were narrower, 5-4, with Kennedy in the majority on each.
Angela Hale, a spokeswoman for the Texas attorney general, said, “The timeline and the procedure for redrawing the only district requiring further action will be addressed by the three-judge federal district court at a hearing in the near future.”
Hector Flores, president of the League of United Latin American Citizens, said the organization was prepared to go to court next week to press its claim that the Texas redistricting violated the voting rights of Hispanics.
If the ruling’s impact on the 2006 elections was unclear, so too, are the longer-term consequences.
Under the Constitution, states are required to adjust their congressional district lines to account for population shifts following the national census, held every decade.
The ruling freed states to readjust the lines more frequently – potentially whenever political power shifts – so long as they do not run afoul of the Voting Rights Act or other laws designed to protect the right to vote.
Even so, Richard Hasen, an election law expert at Loyola Law School, said he doubted there would be a rush to change. “Some people are predicting a rash of mid-decade redistricting. I am skeptical,” he said.
The court’s ruling came in a case in which Texas Republicans embraced controversy at the prodding of DeLay. When they gained control of the state House of Representatives in 2002, he drafted a plan that the GOP eventually pushed through the Legislature.
The result was a gain of several seats for Republicans in 2004. The GOP now has 21 seats in Texas to 11 for the Democrats. Democrats had a 17-15 majority before the shift.
DeLay paid an enormous price. He was indicted on state charges in connection with alleged money-laundering during the 2002 campaign for legislative seats, stepped down as majority leader in the House of Representatives and eventually resigned this month from Congress.