Dueling lawsuits were filed Monday in Wyandotte County District Court challenging a set of GOP-authored congressional maps passed into law last week, arguing they run afoul of the Kansas Constitution and the Kansas Legislature’s own redistricting guidelines.
Both challenges, filed on behalf of 16 residents in Wyandotte, Johnson and Douglas counties, says the maps illegally divide the Kansas City, Kan., area, dividing communities of color in the process, and argues the maps were passed with the express purpose of boosting Republicans and securing the defeat of Kansas’ lone Democrat in Congress, Rep. Sharice Davids.
More:As legislators successfully overturn veto of Kansas Congressional maps, fight heads to the courts
The lawsuit is the first time congressional maps have been challenged in the state, rather than federal, court system.
One suit was filed by a coalition of groups, led by the American Civil Liberties Union of Kansas and the Campaign Legal Center, while the other is led by Loud Light, a civic engagement group targeting younger residents, and is backed by prominent Kansas City, Mo., attorney Barry Grissom and Elias Law Group, a high-profile, Democratic firm that handles voting cases nationally.
Both suits ask the court to draw new Congressional maps if the current plan is struck down, provided the Legislature doesn’t provide a suitable alternative.
Challenges allege partisan, racial gerrymandering
While the maps were vetoed by Gov. Laura Kelly, Republicans managed to overcome her veto — albeit with no shortage of drama — last week.
More:Did Kansas Sen. Mark Steffen trade redistricting vote for bill blocking his COVID investigation?
Most controversially, the maps divide Wyandotte County along Interstate 70, placing the southern swath in the 3rd Congressional District, alongside Johnson, Miami, Franklin and Anderson counties. The northern chunk joins the 2nd Congressional District.
To balance out that move, much of Lawrence, as well as Jackson and Jefferson counties, would leave the 2nd District and move into the 1st District, which runs to the Colorado border, encompassing much of western Kansas.
“The Enacted Plan was deliberately designed to consistently and efficiently elect exclusively Republicans to Congress, and specifically to prevent Democratic voters in the Kansas City Metro Area from electing their preferred candidate, currently Congresswoman Sharice Davids,” the ACLU lawsuit said. “Republican legislative leaders didn’t even try to hide it.”
Republicans have defended the map, arguing it fulfilled the basic goals of keeping Johnson County intact in the 3rd District. Moreover, lawmakers have argued the minority communities in Wyandotte County will be paired with similar groups in the Topeka area.
But the lawsuits echo arguments from advocacy groups throughout the redistricting process, with critics saying it dilutes the voting power of minority groups in Wyandotte County by “surgically” removing them from the 3rd District and placing them in the heavily Republican 2nd District, currently represented by US Rep. Jake LaTurner, R-Kan.
The part of Wyandotte County shifted to the 2nd District is over 59% Black, non-white Hispanic and Asian American, the ACLU lawsuit says, arguing the maps target the most heavily minority precincts in the county. The section added to the 3rd District, meanwhile, is over 90% white.
And the Loud Light challenge notes over 70% of Hispanic voters and over 80% of Black voters in Wyandotte County will now be in the 2nd District.
Moreover, the filings claim the move doesn’t acknowledge the community of interest in the Kansas City, Kan., metro area, ignoring the realities of life that collectively bind the two counties together. Residents frequently cross county lines for work, shopping and other business.
Republicans accurately argue that it was impossible to keep Wyandotte and Johnson counties in the same district, as they alone were above the required population of 734,470.
“This is a math problem with a lot of emotion and we’ve seen a lot of that on display,” Rep. Chris Croft, R-Overland Park, chair of the House Redistricting Committee, said during floor debate last month. “I believe this map was born out of some hard choices.”
But the lawsuits say legislators could have removed Miami County and exurban chunks of Johnson County to preserve the core of the metro area together.
The intent, the suits argue, was to hamstring Democrats across Kansas by targeting the two most reliably liberal parts of the state.
“Ad Astra 2 has several telltale signs of a partisan gerrymander,” the Loud Light suit said “It unnecessarily and inexplicably shifts large numbers of Kansans out of their prior districts, with no population-based need or other legitimate justification, violating the state’s own redistricting criteria.In doing so, it targets the minority party’s most significant strongholds in Wyandotte and Douglas.”
Proponents acknowledge ‘novel’ legal challenge
The Kansas Constitution makes no specific mention of congressional redistricting.
But the challenges argue the map violates the Equal Rights and Political Power clauses of the Kansas Constitution, as well as residents’ rights to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and suffrage.
Other state high courts have already gotten involved in the redistricting process this cycle. The North Carolina Supreme Court, for instance, struck down a set of congressional and legislative maps in that state earlier this month, arguing they amounted to partisan gerrymandering.
In Kansas, no challenge has ever been filed against congressional maps in state court, though legislative districts have been litigated at a state level.
But partisan gerrymandering claims in federal court have become all but impossible under a 2019 US Supreme Court ruling, and it is uncertain how receptive federal justices will be to claims of racial gerrymandering, particularly after a recent ruling dismissing claims that Alabama’s congressional maps were drawn against voters of color.
That means the best hope for advocates and Democrats to overturn the maps likely lies in state court.
Sharon Brett, legal director of the ACLU of Kansas, acknowledged the suit is a “novel” approach to redistricting but believed it would ultimately prove successful.
“It’s an important case to be made here,” she said. “And it’s something that our courts need to decide.”
Attorney General Derek Schmidt said in a statement last week that his office was “prepared to vigorously defend (the maps) against any partisan political lawsuits that long have been threatened.”
Republicans will likely work to ensure any challenge is handled at the federal level, with House Speaker Ron Ryckman, R-Olathe, telling reporters last week that he is optimistic the Kansas Supreme Court will decline to hear the case.
“A lot of attorneys will make money trying, but we are pretty confident it will get upheld,” he said.
Andrew Bahl is a senior statehouse reporter for the Topeka Capital-Journal. He can be reached at [email protected] or by phone at 443-979-6100.
www.cjonline.com
George is Digismak’s reported cum editor with 13 years of experience in Journalism