Republicans in Oregon are asking the courts to step in and block Democrats’ redistricting map alleging that the new plan violates state law.
The new maps approved by the Democratic-controlled legislature last month created Oregon’s new sixth congressional district and reshaped the other five in a way that is all but guaranteed to give Democrats five of the six seats, according to The Oregonian.
Now, four former Republican elected officials are asking the court to invalidate the “obvious, extreme, partisan gerrymander” of the congressional map ahead of the 2022 midterm elections.
They argue that the map violates a state law that bars the drawing of districts for the purpose of favoring any political party, incumbent legislator or other person.
The lawsuit says Democratic lawmakers “privately discussed with members of their own party on the House Redistricting Committee that the proposed map was obviously politically gerrymandered in the Democrats’ favor.”
The lawsuit asks the court to redraw the districts ahead of the 2022 election cycle and make the state pay the Republicans’ attorney’s fees.
Other Republicans in the state were quick to throw their support behind the new lawsuit.
“Gerrymandering is cheating,” House Minority Leader Christine Drazan said in a statement. “Oregon Democrats want a map that protects incumbents and silences the voices of Oregonians. This challenge is an opportunity for the courts to fix the political gerrymandering and create maps that truly represent Oregon.”
However, Republicans might have a difficult time proving their case since Oregon courts have set a high bar for proving that maps are drawn to benefit certain politicians or a political party.
When presented with a similar case in 2001, the Oregon Supreme Court, dismissed the lawsuit saying: “It may be true that, in some circumstances, this court could infer from a record that a Secretary of State had the purpose of favoring one particular political party over another. However, the mere fact that a particular reapportionment may result in a shift in political control … — and that is all that petitioners point to on this record — falls short of demonstrating such a purpose.”
A five-judge panel appointed by the state’s chief justice will hear the case and, if convinced the petitioners are correct, redraw the lines.
