DETROIT – A little more than two years ago, the new Michigan Independent Redistricting Commission finished its work and presented the state with new congressional and legislative maps.
That was followed by hearty congratulations from groups like Voters Not Politicians, which successfully got a state constitutional amendment passed in 2018 that took redistricting away from the legislature, which had been guilty of outrageous gerrymandering, and set up the new non-partisan commission.
The new maps were meant to last a decade, until complete results from the April 1, 2030 census will be available and new maps drawn, based on shifting population trends.
That’s what everyone expected — but that’s not what’s happening. In a bombshell late last year, a panel of three federal judges ruled unanimously that the new maps violate the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and that seven state house districts need to be redrawn before this August’s primary election.
The problem is primarily one of race. A group of African-American voters filed suit charging that the new maps dilute Black voting strength, something federal courts have repeatedly found violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
The judges in this case, Agee v. Benson, agreed, finding that the new maps “submerged” too many African-Americans in districts with a larger white population, making it less likely that those districts would elect Black candidates.
But having to redraw these districts now, while candidates are scrambling to file for the Aug. 6 primary election, is threatening to cause chaos, especially since it may be months before some of them know what district they live and can run in.
Interestingly, the number of African-Americans in the state house didn’t change after the 2022 elections. Blacks did lose representation in the state senate, and these judges indeed did rule that there was a similar situation there and that six seats were found to be in violation.
However, Michigan senators aren’t up for reelection until 2026, and the judicial panel ruled that while the maps must be redrawn, special elections don’t need to be held this year.
But Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson thinks that having to redraw the house district maps this year “threatens an orderly administration” of this year’s elections. That’s because it involves shifting boundaries in a lot more than just the seven districts, because they touch other districts, all of which will have to comply with guidelines about population size, keeping communities together, and racial makeup.
The Michigan Independent Redistricting Commission, which consists of four Republicans, four Democrats and five independents agreed, and asked the U.S. Supreme Court to allow Michigan to hold off on redrawing the districts till after this year’s elections but the nation’s highest court promptly refused.
With that, the panel of judges promptly set up a framework for getting the new districts done. Public hearings in Detroit were scheduled for last week.
The judges then ordered the Independent Redistricting Commission to get back to work and deliver a set of new maps that meet Voting Act Guidelines by tomorrow (Feb. 2).
They also, as a safeguard, appointed Michael Barber, a political science professor at Brigham Young University in Utah, to come up with an alternative redistricting map if they decide to reject the one the redistricting commission produces.
The judges also appointed a special master of sorts, another political science professor, Bernard Grofman of the University of California at Irvine, to review the commission’s work and assess whether it meets constitutional requirements.
Apart from the racial balance question, there are partisan issues at stake as well. Black citizens tend to vote overwhelmingly Democratic, and “packing” them into a few districts could threaten Democrats’ razor-thin majorities in both houses of the legislature.
It’s anyone’s guess as to how all this will play out. But one question that nobody is asking is this:
Is this part of the Voting Rights Act still relevant?
The main purpose of the act was to make sure African-Americans had the right to vote, period, something that was then still widely denied them, especially in the South, and that they had a chance to elect people like themselves. That was once easier. Even as late as 1980, most Blacks in Michigan lived in densely packed neighborhoods in Detroit. That’s no longer the case.
Drawing majority African-American districts today is harder. People are far more dispersed; most Blacks in the Detroit area now live outside the central city. Nor is white oppression the main reason Blacks have failed to win seats in the legislature or Congress.
Time and again, in racially mixed district primaries, there has been a single strong white candidate and four or five Black ones. That’s what happened in 2022 in Michigan’s 13th congressional district, where Shri Thanedar, a native of India, won the Democratic primary with a mere 28 percent of the vote.
Reevaluating or modifying the Voting Rights Act is beyond the scope of all the actors here; it would have to be done by Congress. But that may be an idea whose time really ought to come.
-30-
(Editor’s Note: A version of this column also appeared in the Toledo Blade.)
