Lawsuit: California’s Race-Based Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional

  Shawn Fleetwood  Visit on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

California’s new gerrymandered congressional map was drawn “with illegal racial intent and with illegal racial considerations,” a new lawsuit filed Tuesday alleges.

Brought on behalf of several California residents by the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF), the legal challenge contests the legality of the Golden State’s recently enacted congressional map. Approved by California voters last month via a ballot amendment (Proposition 50), the new map seeks to further gerrymander the state in Democrats’ favor and offset potential gains resulting from Texas Republicans’ redistricting efforts.

As alleged by PILF, the new map “unconstitutionally draws racial districts in violation of Plaintiffs’ civil rights protected by the Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution … and Section 2(a) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.” The elections group specifically claimed that the state did so by “intentionally distorting district boundaries along racial lines to preserve a specific number of Hispanic majority districts and two Black influence districts.”

“Plaintiffs are California residents and voters who were injured when Proposition 50 deliberately enacted district boundaries created for racial purposes and with racial tools,” the lawsuit reads. “Plaintiffs will continue to suffer this injury while this electoral map is in place.”

In its suit, PILF cites comments from Paul Mitchell, a political data scientist tapped to draw the new map. According to the legal group, “In an interview, Paul Mitchell admitted to drawing district lines with intentional racial goals.”