This week, the Missouri Supreme Court accepted an appeals court decision that found the Senate congressional map to be in accordance with the state constitution. This move came in response to a previous accusation raised by some Missouri citizens, claiming that the map, instituted by a court-appointed redistricting commission, failed to adequately maintain communities of interest.
In their recent ruling, the court dismissed the citizens’ challenge, stipulating that the process of congressional redistricting is primarily a political concern, and that such decisions are best taken by political leaders rather than judicial figures.
To align with the Missouri Constitution, the map in question needed to fulfill a list of requirements:
- Population of districts should be as equal as possible, operating on a one-person-one-vote principle.
- The process of establishing districts should conform to all requirements of the United States Constitution and all applicable federal laws.
- Editions to this, districts should be made up of contiguous territory as compact as possible.
- As far as possible and consistent with the first three points, communities should be preserved.
- In a manner that achieves both partisan fairness and, secondly, competitiveness, districts should be drawn where the standards outlined in the first four points take precedence.
The court deemed these elements to be listed in their order of importance, an aspect crucial to this case as the citizens’ challenge to the map was based primarily on the failure to safeguard communities of interest—a requirement that falls fourth in the prioritized list.
Of note, Missouri initially relied on a citizens’ commission to reconfigure the state’s congressional districts. When consensus could not be reached on the map outlines, however, a judicial commission was appointed to this task. The challenged map that resulted from the judicial commission’s work divided Buchanan County and Hazelwood into two separate districts. Citizens argued that this division violated the preservation of communities of interest in the respective areas.
The court refuted this claim, affirming the contested map’s validity. As the requirement for district compactness precedes the stipulation for preserved communities, the court deemed the former to hold higher importance.
The contentious issue of redistricting has taken center stage in many U.S. legal disputes following the 2020 census. Congressional maps, typically redrawn every decade to reflect population changes, have been subject to much debate. Noteworthy examples from recent years include the Alabama congressional map appeal and a December 2023 ruling by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, each of which resulted in the striking down of their respective state’s maps for various reasons, including racial gerrymandering.
More on this story can be found in the original report by JURIST – News.