Next Steps in Disputes in 4 States

Judges in a number of states have recently thrown out election maps, arguing they are gerrymandered to the point of being unconstitutional. The rulings come as courts have become increasingly focused on the issue of extreme partisan gerrymanders — maps that effectively doom political opponents to permanent underrepresentation.

The decisions are certain to have drawn the Supreme Court’s interest as it mulls a resolution to the gerrymandering question. This spring, the justices are expected to decide whether partisan gerrymandering violates the Constitution, and if so, when.

Here are the basics of the major contested cases.

— The state Assembly district map of Wisconsin

The Republicans hold 64 seats in the state Assembly, Wisconsin’s lower house, while the Democrats have 35.

In November 2016, a panel of three judges ruled that the map was unconstitutionally drawn to favor Republicans, the first time a partisan gerrymander was struck down in federal court. The ruling was notable, according to experts, because it provided a clear mathematical formula to measure how partisan a district is.

The decision was appealed to the Supreme Court, which took the case (known as Gill v. Whitford) and heard arguments in October.

The Supreme Court is expected to rule in the spring, probably setting the course for the other cases in federal court as well.

— The statewide congressional district map of North Carolina

Ten seats are held by Republicans, and three by Democrats.

The map was thrown out and ordered redrawn by a panel of three federal judges on Jan. 9, who said that Republicans had drawn it most recently in 2016 in an attempt to gain a political advantage.

Days later, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked the lower court’s order to redraw the map.

It’s unclear. The Supreme Court has not said whether it will schedule an argument in the case, known as Rucho v. Common Cause. It could let a ruling in another gerrymander case stand as the final word for other suits in the federal system. Because of the temporary block, experts say the current map will probably remain in effect for the midterm elections this fall.

— The statewide congressional district map of Pennsylvania

Republicans hold 13 seats, while Democrats hold five.

The state Supreme Court ruled Jan. 22 that the map “clearly, plainly and palpably” violated the state constitution and ordered it redrawn. If the Republican-controlled legislature and the Democratic governor cannot agree on a new map that passes muster by Feb. 15, the court said it would impose one of its own.

If the map is redrawn, there are potential political and legal consequences worth watching.

Republicans hope to get the federal courts to intervene and stay the state court’s order, but experts say the odds are slim that the Supreme Court will intrude on a legal dispute that appears to exclusively involve state, not federal, issues.

If not, the May 15 primary and Nov. 6 midterm general election will be held using a new map, though a March 13 special election will continue to use the old one.

— The boundaries of the 6th Congressional District in Maryland

Democrats hold seven seats, while Republicans hold one.

The boundaries of the 6th Congressional District have been the subject of legal challenges since they were drawn in 2011. In the current case, known as Benisek v. Lamone, Republicans contesting the legality of the district boundaries were denied a preliminary injunction by a three-judge federal panel, and appealed that denial to the Supreme Court, which unexpectedly took the case.

The case argues that Democratic state lawmakers drew the map to place the Republican incumbent, Rep. Roscoe G. Bartlett, at a political disadvantage, violating the voters’ First Amendment rights.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments in the case in late March, but the map remains in effect in the time being.