Constitutional Law, Politics

New York Appellate Court Declares Democrats Engaged in Unlawful Gerrymandering

We previously discussed how a New York judge struck down the new voting districts pushed through by Democrats as unconstitutional gerrymandering.  That was followed by another blistering decision striking down the Democratic plan for Maryland as “extreme partisan gerrymandering.” Now an appellate court has also found that Democrats were trying to rig the next election and the five-judge panel ruled  against the plan. The Democrats also recently lost a redistricting fight in Wisconsin after their map was found to be “racially motivated” and unconstitutional.

“Voters should choose their representatives — not the other way around.” Those words by President Biden followed a decision by North Carolina’s supreme court rejecting new state legislative districts that favored Republicans.

Biden was not alone. Former President Obama condemned Republican gerrymandering efforts as threatening democracy. The liberal Brennan Center has declared that “gerrymandering is deeply undemocratic.”

While denouncing Republicans for gerrymandering as attack on democracy, Democratic figures like lawyer Marc Elias are under attack for raising millions to support Democratic gerrymandering.

Elias declared “Republicans gerrymander like this because they do not want free and fair elections.”

Nevertheless, Democratic figures are pledging to fight for these gerrymandered maps, including Gov. Kathy Hochul and top legislative leaders.

The New York plan was a raw and obvious effort to rig the election. Indeed, the district designed to reelect House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler would make Elbridge Gerry blush. In 1812, Gerry — a Founding Father, vice president and governor of Massachusetts — signed off on a district designed to guarantee a seat for the precursor of today’s Democratic Party. The district resembled a salamander, so the Boston Gazette deemed it the “Gerry-mander.”

Notably, the original gerrymandered district looks a lot like what is now being dubbed the “Gerrymander.”

Republicans currently hold eight of New York’s 27 seats in Congress. (The state will lose one district due to population declines). Despite being a state in which roughly 38 percent of voters went for Trump in 2020, Republicans would have an advantage only in four districts under the redrawn map, allowing Democrats to pick up the other four. For example, Republican Rep. Nicole Malliotakis previously beat an incumbent, Democrat Max Rose, in the 11th District. To guarantee that Rose will win, Democrats stretched the district to include the liberal area of Park Slope in Brooklyn.

Notably, Democrats are celebrating one aspect of the ruling. The appellate court ruling would allow the Democrats to control the next map after ignoring the express wishes of the voters of New York.

In 2014, New Yorkers took the extraordinary step of amending Sections 4 and 5 of Article III of their state’s constitution. They created the New York Independent Redistricting Commission to prohibit drawing maps “for the purpose of favoring or disfavoring incumbents or other particular candidates or political parties.” (N.Y. Const. art. III, § 4(c)(5)).

However, the fix was in. After proclaiming a new day of fair and honest elections, the commission was set at ten members divided evenly. Senate Deputy Majority Leader Michael Gianaris, a Queens Democrat, admitted that the commission was designed to fail: “Of course it was. When you have an equal amount of people from either side, you are inevitably going to get a deadlock or a tie. And that’s exactly what happened here.”

In other words, all the democracy stuff was a lie. When the commission inevitably deadlocked, the Democratic-controlled legislature went on a gerrymandering frenzy.

Now, the appellate ruling would allow the reinstatement of the state Senate rather than require the use of the commission or a bipartisan process. Democrats are celebrating that the Commission effort is now effectively dead.  Mike Murphy, a spokesman for Senate Democrats, said they were “pleased” that the appeals court had effectively validated the prior Assembly and Senate maps.

In other words, the New York voters were chumps. They demanded an end to gerrymandering but the Democratic members created a commission designed to fail so that the prior system remains in effect.

Gerrymandering continues to be a practice by both parties. However, the New York map is a glaring example where a pro-democracy effort from voters was knowingly scuttled by politicians. Likewise, as figures like Elias raise millions to “fight for democracy,” courts like the one in Maryland ruled that the Democratic map not only violate a host of constitutional protections but “subverts the will of those governed.”

What is striking is the silence of many in the media and the party itself, including figures like Biden and Obama. The outcry over protecting democracy ring hallow when Democrats are actively seeking to rig elections and negate the pro-democratic measures passed by voters.

69 thoughts on “New York Appellate Court Declares Democrats Engaged in Unlawful Gerrymandering”

  1. Shouldn’t Dr. Turley be concerned about Republican gerrymandering in Florida and Ohio? If not, why not? If gerrymandering is wrong in New York it is wrong, no matter what political party is doing it.

    1. It is the Democrats who, while they are gerrymandering, yell the loudest.

    2. Turley has written articles and been on TV talking about accusation of republican gerrymandering. Keep up.

    3. Why do Dems always ignore the difference between legal and illegal? Just like immigration, there is also legal and illegal gerrymandering. Florida’s recent redistricting has not been found illegal by any court yet, so why should Turley be expected to be concerned about it. As far as I know, Texas has not been found to be illegally gerrymandering either.

  2. Instead of allowing myself to get irate, I played a recording of Sonny & Cher’s “And the Beat Goes On.”
    Who would want to get irate on a Friday afternoon, on Earth Day to boot, and with a beautiful weekend ahead? I’ll leave that to the talking heads, the pundits, who in their own minds know everything and have their own set of facts and factoids —and the beat most definitely goes on….

  3. IMO, the DNC is a criminal enterprise and needs to be taken down by RICO!

  4. OT

    THE OBAMA COUP D’ETAT IN AMERICA PLOT THICKENS

    Reports: Former Prime Minister Renzi and the Italian Deep State Are Worried About John Durham’s Investigation into the Russiagate Sham

    As John Durham digs into his investigation of the Russiagate scam that was pushed around the globe, Italy’s Deep State is reportedly getting worried about what Durham may uncover.

    We reported in 2020 that the origins of the Trump – Russia collusion, Russiagate or Spygate, [all the same thing] started in Italy. We learned in 2020, from a document release that was highly classified, that the origin of Crossfire Hurricane [the Deep State FBI’s name for the Trump-Russia collusion sham] started in July of 2016. The Crossfire Hurricane launch letter begins with this:

    Details:
    (S/ /REL TO USA[Redacted] On Wednesday, July 27, 2016, Legal Attaché (Legat) [Redacted] was summoned to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Mission (DCM) for the [Redacted] who will be leaving [Redacted] post Saturday July 30, 2016 and set to soon thereafter retire from government service, advised [Redacted] was called by [Redacted] about an urgent matter requiring an in person meeting with the U.S. Ambassador. [Note: [Redacted]. The [Redacted] was scheduled to be away from post until mid-August, therefore [Redacted] attended the meeting.

    We determined that Obama’s ambassador to the Vatican, the Holy See (i.e. Catholic Church in Rome, Italy) had a change in the Chief of Mission in July 2016. Ken Hackett was Obama’s US Ambassador to the Holy See and he eventually retired in early 2017. The Legat there at the time was Kieran Ramsey.

    Was this why Obama held his last state dinner for Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi?

    We also knew that in 2019, then US Attorney General William Barr and Special Counsel John Durham met with Italy’s spy chief, not once but twice. What were they getting at?

    Today reports are coming out of Italy that the Italians are getting worried about the Durham investigation. One report at The Eye of the Needle shares:

    The Ancient Roman saying, Excusatio petita, accusatio manifesta is often a source of pure truth. For non-English speaking people, it means that if you defend yourself for a crime for which you have not been accused of in the first place, you’re admitting your guilt.

    And this say is the first thing that comes to mind when we read one of the latest tweets by Matteo Renzi, the former Italian PM.

    Renzi claims that the accusations against him and Obama of conspiracy against President Trump are completely “foolish”, and he also considers “very concerning” the fact that someone thought that these claims could be true.

    – Joe Hoft

  5. I wouldn’t want to be the person standing downwind of Nadler when he heard this!

  6. I propose a radical change to how power is distributed in Congress and it will make gerrymandering, as we know it, a thing of the past.

    1. Require every eligible, registered voter to take a civics exam (USCIS -10 questions). If they don’t want to take the exam, they would register a 0%.
    2. Total the average score for each congressional district and for each state.
    3. The candidate that wins the seat will have the voting power of the district or state that elected them. So if the average score for the district is 60%, then the voting power for that member of the House would be 60% of 1 full vote. A Senator whose state has an average civics score of 50% would wield less power than a Senator representing a state of 75%.

    The odds of this happening are about the same for term limits, balanced budgets amendments and the end of gerrymandering.

    1. Better to apply the score directly to the individual voter’s impact on the election.

    2. The House passed legislation that would end gerrymandering by requiring that districts be determined by a non-partisan commission.

      The Senate Republicans filibustered it.

      1. requiring that districts be determined by a non-partisan commission.
        Were do we look for this unicorn?

        1. I had come up with a solution some years back. High School statistics teams. One from each State Drawn at random.

          As usual the devil is in the details. Someone has to gather the data and make the rules.

  7. Turley writes to his Trump base, oh look over here, all the while ignoring the on going coup attempts red states are setting in place at county, state and federal office to count what they want counted.

      1. Why do Trumpers pretend Trump isn’t still making crazy statements every day?

        1. Why don’t you tell us those statements in context or do you have nothing of value to say?

          1. As long as Trump keeps disputing the election he’s a threat to the nation. And if you’re still disputing, show us ‘one’ court case Trump has won.

            1. With a comment like that you must be the blog’s ATS. H. Clinton has been threat to the nation since the 2016 election but all of that is ATS BS. John Say has already posted half-dozen or more articles on where and why cheating was likely. When you start proving those accusations false I will listen to you more seriously.

              In any event you asked for ” ‘one’ court case Trump has won”. You won’t like this one so I will provide another if needed.

              Jefferson v. Dane County

        3. Hell….Now do Kamala. Whenever she speaks, she tries to sound like she is Maya Angelou or something, and repeats the same words over and over not making any sense…but then….she is trying to keep up with Joe.

    2. “On going coup attempts red states are setting in place” – bwaahahaha! No, the red states are just trying to cut the progressives off at the pass so the likes of Mark Zuckerberg, Marc Elias and Stacey Abrams can’t gin up massive numbers of completely unverifiable mail-in and absentee ballots like they did in 2020. Fool me once, shame on me…you know the thing.

      1. Allen, were you waiting for the Easter bunny and just lost it when he didn’t come? Spoiler alert……..don’t wait up for Santa.

    2. But Turley’s not paid to be fair or even reasonable–he’s paid to attack Democrats and to ignore today’s BIG political story: Kevin McCarthy was RECORDED on a call with Liz Cheney saying that he was going to recommend to Trump that he resign. The recording of this call surfaced AFTER McCarthy accused the NYT reporters who broke the print version of the story of lying about recommending that Trump resign. Not only will Turley ignore this story, he’ll find some other story to use to deflect attention away from Republicans and their lying. But, the disciples won’t care.

      2. Do try to stay on topic, which is the hypocrite Democrats tried to pull a fast one and gerrymander NY in their favor.

        BTW: The only thing I care about is seeing the Democrats swept from power in the midterms hopefully in a veto proof majority so we can effectively end the term of the Dotard in Chief two years early.

  9. (OT)

    Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s spokesperson recently said “McCarthy never said he’d call Trump to say he should resign” after Jan. 6. But here McCarthy is on tape on Jan. 10, 2021: “I’m going to call him [Trump] … the only discussion I would have with him is that I think this [impeachment resolution] will pass, and it would be my recommendation that you should resign. Um, I mean I that would be my take, but I don’t think he would take it.”
    https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1517312049612607488

      1. Slight difference being recorded saying something contrary his public position, and that same person attacking President Trump with an unsubstantiated foul canard.

      2. What a foolish conclusion some can draw from secondary sources. Did Trump have some responsibility? Of course, but that responsibility can be both good and bad. His existence as President involved him in the situation. Did Pelosi have responsibility? Of course, and for the same reason. She performed her duties very poorly, making her far more responsible for all the bad things on Jan6. She, not Trump, is who we should be focussing our eyes on. She did not act responsibly to the detriment of the nation. Trump was there as President. She was one of the actors.

        This snippet demonstrates that the person who believes this video has meaning is just a bit more stupid than the average fool.

        1. Stop lying:

          “(CNN)Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio suggested Wednesday that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had been responsible for the security presence at the US Capitol on January 6, after Pelosi rejected his appointment to serve on the select committee investigating the insurrection.

          “Why wasn’t there a proper security presence at the Capitol that day,” Jordan asked at a news conference after House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy pulled all five members he had tapped for the committee in response to Pelosi rejecting two of them. The Ohio Republican added, “Only one person can answer that question. Only one. The Speaker of the United States House of Representatives.”

          Facts First: The Speaker of the House is not in charge of Capitol security. That’s the responsibility of the Capitol Police Board, which oversees the US Capitol Police and approves requests for National Guard assistance.

          Jane L. Campbell, president and CEO of the US Capitol Historical Society, told CNN that “the Speaker of the House does not oversee security of the US Capitol, nor does this official oversee the Capitol Police Board.”

          Pelosi also cannot unduly influence who is appointed to the Board, which consists of the House and Senate Sergeants at Arms, the Architect of the Capitol and the Chief of the Capitol Police. The Sergeants at Arms are elected and must be confirmed by their respective chambers and the Architect must be confirmed by both chambers of Congress.

          And according to testimony from the former Capitol Police chief, Pelosi was not involved in the decisions made ahead of January 6 regarding the National Guard. In his testimony before the Senate in February, former US Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund said that he approached both Sergeants at Arms on the House and Senate side on January 4 to request the National Guard through an Emergency Declaration from the Capitol Police Board.

          His request, according to Sund, was not approved. Instead, the Senate Sergeant at Arms Michael C. Stenger “suggested I ask (the National Guard) how quickly we could get support if needed and to ‘lean forward’ in case we had to request assistance on January 6,” according to Sund’s testimony.

          Following the events of January 6, the US Capitol Police announced it was working “with Congressional oversight and the Capitol Police Board to obtain the authority to immediately request National Guard assistance if needed without having to wait for board approval.”

          2. Capital Architect and the Sargent at arms work together. Those two report to either the Senate Majority leader of the Speaker of the house, on a rotating schedule. Jan 6 was Nancy Pelosi

            The Capital Architect and the Sargent at Arms DO NOT have the power to call for the National Guard. ONLY the Mayor of DC or the Speaker of the House could have ASKED for the National Guard, which would have to be approved by the President. The President CAN NOT order up the National Guard, it has to be asked for.

            This is about the sixth time I have laid out the protocol. Not a single person has challenged these fact.

      3. I noticed mspms was focusing on this.

        So What? Exactly how does this have, even a tangential connection to the Democrat selected Jan 6 committee?

        1. Who claimed that it’s related to the bipartisan J6 Committee? (Not me.)

  10. As old as time it is. Both sides do it, even educated fleas do it.

    The story that some fail to see is that while both do it, only the R’s get hammered for it in the press.

  11. My GOODness! Democrats engaged in Gerrymandering ? How can that be ?! Conventional ‘ wisdom ‘ declares Republicans are the evil Gerrymanderers, NOT Democrats !!

  12. The heart of the matter is power. Raw power. The genius of our form of government has granted power to the individual citizen and is extraordinarily rare in the scope of history. It is also fragile and precious. We are witnessing a premeditated, direct assault on our citizens, our form of government, our way of life. Non-elected government officials and regulators, corporations, foreign actors, and the dismal state of our once respected media and newspapers work to bypass the regular legislative process.

    This case or redistricting is but a single example. Yes, there is historical precedent for this. However, there is also precedent for destroying a government and a nation in the name of Marxism.

    What is the goal of the “Limousine Liberals.” (borrowed this term from Al Sharpton) These are the über rich, the glitter rich bicoastal elites who burn a lot of dirty fossil fuel in their personal jets to attend climate conferences and travel between their coastal mansions and mountain lodges. These are the ones who presume to lecture the common citizen. Don’t they know the oceans are rising quickly and will swallow up their spreads? What is their goal? It appears to be to wreck the economy and to impose a new world order and destroy the middle class and the citizens who can think for themselves. Like the cult leaders Jim Jones and despots like Kim Jon-Un, Xi Jinping and Ali Khameni they despise decent. They despise being questioned. If they can’t shut someone up they employ tactics to attack and destroy the dissenter. To accuse the dissenter and bury them under so many lawsuits they are rendered ineffective. They have the power of media and legions of lawyers to do it.

    If the election were held fairly, the liberal wing of the Democratic Party is going to take a whipping in November. It will be interesting to see what event or crisis will occur between now and then. They and the WH administration (those who are directing the president) act as though they are deaf to the extraordinary economic challenges of everyday citizens. They are hell bent to ignore the law and the constitution regarding the open border, the free-flow of narcotics, human trafficking. Why? There is no rational answer. Therefore there must be some warped and irrational purpose? How can you “build back better” if you do not first destroy what exists now?

    1. “The heart of the matter is power. Raw power.”
      ********************************
      Always is. Very Nietzche. As in foundational human nature, as in prescient, as in dead solid right!

    2. And just who pulled the lever for all these elites? If we ended welfare (The ironic Great Society), these progressives would have very few votes. Let’s get to the gist of this; just how do you eliminate millions of human flotsam who have the ability to vote themselves the largesse of the nation? This monstrous threat to our nation is the creation of the democrat party held in thrall by progressives within our university systems for the sole purpose of achieving just the mess we have now.

    3. The genius of our form of government has granted power to the individual citizen and is extraordinarily rare in the scope of history

      Along with a federal government that his severly limited, enumerated power.

      The power emenates up from the people, to the States. The federal govt is an invention of the people to do what the States cannot do. Hence, enumerated limited power.

  14. Democrats decry gerrymandering…and use it egregiously. Democrats label the filibuster Jim Crow…yet used it last time they were in the minority and in fact used it even this term. Democrats want to overturn Citizens United because they disdain money in politics…yet raise more money IN EVERY SINGLE ELECTION CYCLE, including from PUBLIC unions. Democrats want to end “disinformation” by using censorship…yet used disinformation with the Russian Collusion story and the Hunter laptop story, the two stories that arguably were the most effective in changing election results or in fact a presidency. remember also the famous “video” that cause the Benghazi attack. Obama, the great liberator fighting disinformation, sent Susan Rice on LL FIVE Sunday shows to state that the video cause the attack. Was that disinformation?

    Democrats, the greatest projectors/hypocrites we have ever seen.

  15. Turley says:

    “The outcry over protecting democracy ring hallow when Democrats are actively seeking to rig elections and negate the pro-democratic measures passed by voters.”

    The Democrat’s outcry over protecting democracy to which Turley is referring undoubtedly is the 1/6 committee’s investigation into the Republican’s attempt to delegitimize Biden’s victory over Trump. While the Democrats are hypocritical, Turley is not- he criticizes Democratic gerrymandering, as well as NOT criticizing the committee’s investigation into Trump and his cronies for trying to overturn the results of the election.

    It’s highly commendable that Turley is not hostile to the committee’s work unlike Trumpists and Fox News which vilify it.

    1. Quite the stretch there, Silberman. I don’t think Turley even gave one thought to the 1/6 Inquisition when he made that comment – he was not “undoubtably” referring to it.

      1. Allen,

        You may be correct, but Turley had in mind something that the Democrats are concerned about protecting. It is not unlikely he was referring to the 1/6 Commission’s work. I grant you I can’t prove it unless Turley answers us but that ain’t gonna happen. Whatever he was thinking, the larger point is that Turley does not condemn nor attack the commission’s legitimate investigation despite the Trumpists calling it a “witch-hunt.”

        1. Lamebrain or numskull, Turley is an attorney that frequently testifies in front of such committees. That would give him a lot of reason, but you don’t seem able to think.

    2. Speaking of legislative attempts to “negate the pro-democratic measures passed by voters,” Florida comes to mind. Florida voters chose to re-enfranchise former felons who’d completed their time in jail and probation, and the legislature then made it illegal for former felons to vote until they’d paid all fines/fees and made it a new felony to vote if some fees/fines were still owed, yet the state will not tell former felons how much they owe, making it difficult for former felons to know whether or not they can legally vote.

      1. The felons were initially told what they owed. They have little problem in asking for and getting the information they need. Are you trying to create something that doesn’t exist? That seems to be most of what your rhetoric is about.

  16. While Turley meekly mentions that both parties do it. The democrats are embracing what republicans have been doing for decades. What is funny is that I haven’t seen Turley lob this kind of criticism in republicans when they do it. If Turley states democrats are “rigging” the election that is a tacit acknowledgment that republicans have been “rigging” theirs for years.

    1. I have lived in MA for 20 years, in that time MA has had all but 1 Republican governors. I don’t think MA has had a Republican representative in 15 years. We did have Republican senator for a bit. Republicans have a chance in statewide elections, no chance with democrat drawn districts. Funny how that works and it has been that way for decades

      1. Anonymous, as a FORMER resident of MA I say that your comment is spot on. How can a state elect Republican governors year afetr year and NEVER have even one Republican member of congress?

        Svelaz claims to be a Republican and yet only sees Republican perfidy in redistricting even though it occurs from Democrats just as often, as shown by Anonymous’ comment regarding MA and as the story above shows about NY.

        Jeff, even though he agrees with Turley he is unable to comment even once without the Fox/Trump rant. Pure insanity.

    2. Oh please. Democrats have engaged in gerrymandering since before the GOP was even a party. They have refined and weaponized it. Republicans could only hope to be as effective at it as the Dems have been.

  17. “Democratic figures are pledging to fight for these gerrymandered maps . . .”

    Gerrymandering for me, but not for thee.

    I think we’ve seen this movie before.

  18. As much as I personally detest Gerrymandering, it is as old as the republic. Both sides engage in it and defend their version while excoriating the other side for being undemocratic. I think the best we can do is to strike down the really bad cases when they cross that invisible line and live with the rest of the mess. I would love to see a non-partisan group come up with a set of maps that work for all, but let us face it, that is a pipe dream when there is so much power involved.

Comments are closed.