Analyzing Gill v. Whitford

Analyzing Gill v. Whitford: When Does Legislative Redistricting on Partisan Lines Become Unconstitutional?

Speaker: 

• Bradley A. Smith, Former Chairman, Federal Elections Commission & Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault Designated Professor of Law, Capital University Law School

The United States Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Gill v. Whitford in early October. While the Court previously found that claims that excessive partisan gerrymandering violated the Constitution were justiciable, in Vieth v. Jubelier (2004), the justices unanimously upheld a Pennsylvania redistricting plan but split on whether it was possible to develop a justiciable standard for analyzing partisan gerrymandering. In Gill, the Court will examine whether a redistricting plan implemented by Wisconsin Republicans in 2011 violates the First Amendment’s freedom of association clause and the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause.

Could the Supreme Court distort the proper role of legislative bodies and of the courts by effectively giving federal courts the green light to regularly police state legislative redistricting? Or is such oversight needed, given gerrymandered redistricting plans that allegedly disadvantage majorities of voters, encourage extreme views in both parties, and discourage compromise? What impact could the Court’s decision in Gill have in legislative bodies around the country? Professor Bradley A. Smith, a former chairman of the Federal Elections Commission, will analyze the issues before the Supreme Court in Gill and provide his thoughts on how the Court’s decision could impact American politics.

The cost of lunch and attendance is $15.00. 

Please RSVP by Tuesday, October 10 to Matthew R. Byrne at matthew.byrne@jacksonlewis.com. Pay at the door or in advance by cash or check (payable to "The Federalist Society"). 

Members and non-members alike are always welcome.