Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Lightfoot paying little more than lip service to federal consent decree?
Next Post: Today marks the one-year anniversary of DeVore’s bounty (and he still hasn’t paid up)
Posted in:
* Tribune…
Republicans and a Latino voting rights group have filed alternatives to the state legislative districts drawn by Democrats, with both challenges pushing for greater Chicago-area Latino representation than provided in the map signed into law by Gov. J.B. Pritzker.
In federal court filings on Wednesday, both the GOP and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund contended the Democratic-drawn map violates constitutional and federal Voting Rights Act guarantees by diluting the votes of a growing Latino population. […]
In its filing, MALDEF contended the Democratic map violates the federal Voting Rights Act “with regard to Latino voters on the North Side and Southwest Side of Chicago” and that Democrats engaged in a “racial gerrymander” aimed at protecting white Southwest Side incumbents. […]
Democrats have until Nov. 22 to file their response to the alternatives with the court. The challengers will have until the week after to respond to Democrats. In court arguments over the boundaries are scheduled to begin Dec. 6.
* Capitol News Illinois…
The proposed GOP maps would create four House districts in northern Cook County where Latinos make up a majority of the citizen voting age population, seven Latino-majority districts in southern Cook County and one district in nearby Aurora, District 50, where Latinos make up slightly less than half the voting age population but would still have an opportunity to elect a Latino candidate.
Their plan would also create a Black-majority House district centered in East St. Louis.
Their proposed map would reconfigure House Districts 3, 4, 39 and 77, primarily in Chicago’s northwest side and neighboring suburbs like Franklin Park and Melrose Park. Other districts around those proposed Latino districts would be adjusted so they would be substantially equal in population, but otherwise would be similar to their configuration in the September maps.
In southern Cook County, the GOP map would reconfigure House Districts 1, 2, 21, 22, 23, 24 and 32, all in Chicago’s southwest side and adjacent suburbs such as Berwyn, Cicero, and Burbank.
MALDEF’s map would create 10 Latino citizen voting age population majority House districts and four such Senate districts.
* A.D. Quig at Crain’s…
In a separate interview with Crain’s, Gov. J.B. Pritzker said he hadn’t yet seen the maps released by Republicans, so he couldn’t comment directly on whether they expanded minority representation, but did say “Republicans are not known for doing things to increase diversity and representation. Just look at their caucus.” […]
The UCCRO/NAACP coalition submitted their own fresh map that they say addresses the dilution of the Black vote in the 114th House District (currently represented by Rep. LaToya Greenwood). Their proposal keeps certain communities like Washington Park, Belleville, and the Scott Air Force Base together and boosts the Black voting age population to 49.45%, up from the 33.55% in the current map.
But it’s unclear whether the courts will take up any of the remedial maps. Ami Gandhi, senior counsel at the Chicago Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights who is representing UCCRO in the case, said they are “still awaiting details from the court on what procedures it will be planning from here on out.”
* Other stuff…
* Charles Selle: Illinois congressional districts were ‘cherrymandered’
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 11:13 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Lightfoot paying little more than lip service to federal consent decree?
Next Post: Today marks the one-year anniversary of DeVore’s bounty (and he still hasn’t paid up)
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Now we wait to see how the judge might look at these new maps.
I’m glad these maps were created, now they will need to be defended too.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 11:32 am
You are quire right, Oswego Willy. Having immediate access to alternative plans is the best strategy for resolving conflicts. They should allow the judge to find common ground that might serve each interest group sufficiently (satisficing), or justification for not making changes.
Comment by H-W Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 11:41 am
=== They should allow the judge to find common ground that might serve each interest group sufficiently (satisficing), or justification for not making changes.===
Why should Dems “allow” the judge to do anything except rule on the map in question, and use these other maps as a way for the GOP, et al, to show how they see a map being legally acceptable.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 11:48 am
=Why should Dems “allow” the judge to do anything=
Separation of Powers?
To be honest, I am convinced the judge will rule only on the legislative map, and determine whether or not it is unconstitutional. I do not believe it is, and so I believe the judge will simply certify it.
But as a bleeding heart, I would prefer judicial overreach in this case.
Comment by H-W Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 12:03 pm
=== But as a bleeding heart, I would prefer judicial overreach in this case.===
Pesky constitution…
:)
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 12:07 pm
I think the Federal Court would have more of an ability to chime in on the maps if the republicans had actually offered them up during the map making process. Offering them up for the judicial branch to alter definitely calls for an over reach.
Comment by Another Perspective Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 12:26 pm
Is there a more detailed MALDEF map that I am just not finding? Or is the one at the link above the best we have? That one is not very useful.
Comment by Been There Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 12:59 pm
- H-W - Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 12:03 pm:
It’s judges, not judge.
Comment by Shield Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 1:18 pm
===detailed MALDEF map that I am just not finding?===
They sent out the wrong map the other day.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 1:24 pm
No surprise the most progressive Governor has missed the seismic shift among Hispanics to Republicans these past two elections
https://www.rollcall.com/2021/06/23/as-democrats-go-hard-left-hispanics-head-to-the-center/
https://www.city-journal.org/will-the-hispanic-right-turn-last
https://www.city-journal.org/will-the-hispanic-right-turn-last
Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 1:36 pm
=== seismic shift among Hispanics to Republicans these past two elections===
… and yet the Governor and his ticket swept, the super-majority Dems were made more solid in the Senate, kept above 71 in the House.
If that is your take, then Dems should reward other ethnic groups and not Hispanics, as they can’t be counted on to vote for Dems… all the while meeting the VRA in the representing the makeup of this state.
We’ll see.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 1:43 pm
I wish they would release a Google Maps version of these maps so we could analyze them. These image files of squiggly lines aren’t very useful.
Comment by The Captain Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 1:56 pm
Did I miss the public hearings on these maps? Where the public could read them and respond and the map makers would take questions? You know, the bit that was necessary for “fair” maps?
Comment by Socially DIstant watcher Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 2:01 pm
===Did I miss the public hearings on these maps?===
There will be a public hearing in the federal court.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 2:22 pm
If Democrats are supposed to be the party fighting for minority representation and voting rights, how did the Republicans manage to draw a map with more than twice as many Latino districts and kept the black community whole in the Metro-East? Oh that’s right, Dems drew a political map to maintain political power and did so pretending it was all about protecting minority voting rights.
Comment by Hahaha Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 2:47 pm
- Hahaha -
If all that’s true, why are Republicans not touting such a map?
It’s quite odd
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 2:57 pm
Keep in mind that to get to the Republican/MALDEF maps, the challengers have to demonstrate the approved (revised) map is constitutionally defective. It is not enough to merely show the map could be improved.
Comment by Original Anon Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 3:24 pm
==Their proposal keeps certain communities like Washington Park, Belleville, and the Scott Air Force Base together and boosts the Black voting age population to 49.45%, up from the 33.55% in the current map.==
That would potentially put Hoffman in with Greenwood or would place him in a district that takes in all the rural parts of Greenwood’s district, which likely be Trump+15 at least.
Comment by The Real Downstate Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 3:43 pm
OW - A quick look at the House GOP & ILGOP socials would tell you they are. How else do you propose they “tout”? The only audience that matters now is the panel of judges.
Comment by Hahaha Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 4:22 pm
===The only audience that matters now is the panel of judges.===
If that is true than the only reason they made a map was because they were compelled to, not to show voters they have one.
That’s not a great argument to even wanting “fair maps”
With that logic the GOP already knows the map issue won’t move any voter, lol
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 4:25 pm
You can tell Democrats have major egg on their face because of this because this is major development in a momentous judicial proceeding on the future of the leg map for 10 years and there is a whopping total of 21 comments on the CapFax post - 3 from me. Big yikes.
Comment by Hahaha Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 5:02 pm
=== have major egg on their face===
Huh?
Seems as though people are moving on until a ruling is reached.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 15, 21 @ 5:10 pm