Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Caption contest!
Next Post: Federal judge upholds Illinois law banning ICE detentions in local jails: “States are sovereigns. Counties are not”
Posted in:
* As I’ve been telling you, this argument is at the core of the Democratic defense of its state legislative redistricting law and it was prominently featured during oral arguments yesterday. From the Capitol News Illinois report…
“Illinois in 2020 is not your grandfather’s Illinois,” Sean Berkowitz, an attorney defending the maps passed by the General Assembly in August and signed by Pritzker in September, told the judges.
Berkowitz pointed to the fact that there are a number of Black lawmakers in the Statehouse who do not come from predominantly Black communities. He also pointed to the fact that even though whites make up the largest racial group in Illinois, the current lieutenant governor, attorney general and secretary of state are all Black while one U.S. senator, Tammy Duckworth, is Asian American.
“Crossover voting in Illinois is the norm, not the exception,” he said, adding that Illinois today “is not Mississippi in 1965 or Illinois in 1980.” […]
[Plaintiffs] attorneys spent the morning trying to convince the judges that racially polarized voting does continue to exist in Illinois and that if the maps approved by the legislature are allowed to stand, Latino and Black voters will lose political influence in state government.
In particular, they argued that many of the minority members of the General Assembly were first appointed to their seats after their predecessors stepped down in the middle of their. That gave the appointed lawmakers a significant advantage by allowing them to run as incumbents.
There was also a dispute about how any problems should be remedied, either through court action or sending it back to the GA, so click here to read the rest.
*** UPDATE *** Related press release…
The Illinois Supreme Court today announced the lifting of the pause order regarding the judicial redistricting in Public Act 102-0011 (Act), which will change the judicial district boundaries for the first time since they were established in 1964. Effective January 1, 2022, the Court’s order pausing the implementation of redistricting pursuant to the Act will be vacated.
The new order is available on the court website by clicking here.
On June 7, 2021, the Court entered the order which paused the transition to a new judicial redistricting statute. That order directed that appeals and other matters shall continue to be filed in the judicial districts as they existed on June 3, 2021, the day before Gov. Pritzker signed the Act into law on June 4, 2021. The Act was paused to give the courts sufficient time to plan and implement the significant changes it required.
Beginning on January 1, a notice of appeal initiating an appeal to the appellate court or a direct appeal to the Supreme Court pursuant to Rule 302(b) shall be transmitted by the clerk of the circuit court to the appropriate appellate district as established by the Act. Additionally, a petition or application or motion under Rule 303(d), Rule 303A, Rule 306, Rule 307(d), Rule 308, Rule 335, Rule 604(c), or Rule 606(c) will be filed in the appropriate appellate district as established by the Act. These provisions will apply regardless of the date of the judgment appealed or sought to be appealed.
Circuit courts will remain subject to the rule that states that when conflicts arise among the districts the circuit court is bound by the decisions of the appellate court of the district in which it sits. In a redistricted circuit, the appropriate appellate district will be the district in which the circuit was located at the time that the circuit court action was initiated.
If a case is heard by one appellate district on appeal and if a subsequent appeal in that case is heard by a new appellate district pursuant to this order, the new district will treat the decision of the prior district as the law of the case. That the decision of the prior district applied the law of the prior district that is contrary to the law of the new district will not be a basis for departing from the decision of the prior district.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Dec 8, 21 @ 9:40 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Caption contest!
Next Post: Federal judge upholds Illinois law banning ICE detentions in local jails: “States are sovereigns. Counties are not”
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I would like to see some actual data on crossover voting at the voter level, rather than anecdotal evidence that white folks sometimes elect ethnic minority candidates.
But perhaps a better argument regarding redistricting (from the perspective of ethnic minority groups) would be to analyze the indices of residential segregation (e.g., Black/White index of dissimilarity; Hispanic/White Anglo index of dissimilarity, etc.). For decades now (cf. Massey and Denton 1987?), it has been demonstrate that Illinois is one of the top five most residentially segregated states, and Chicago is always in the top 3 Metropolitan areas in the Nation. In short, Illinoisans live segregated lives at the census tract level, and thus drawing districts along political preferences is quite likely to produce ethnic and racial inequalities.
Comment by H-W Wednesday, Dec 8, 21 @ 9:53 am
Plaintiff attorneys made a lethal mistake not taking full advantage of the line of questioning about sending it back to the GA to cut a deal. It’s the path of least resistance for the panel and would all but ensure they’d at least make the MALDEF and NAACP changes even if they were de minimus.
Comment by Co- Conspirator Wednesday, Dec 8, 21 @ 9:57 am
Pretty cool that Illinois solved racism. Someone should pass along the secret.
Comment by SWSider Wednesday, Dec 8, 21 @ 10:05 am
Let’s take a look at the members of the Black Caucus and where they were elected from starting with the first Black Speaker of the House Emanuel “Chris” Welch. The data indicates his district the last ten years was less than 50% black, and it appears the new district is less than 50% Black. Rep. Ammons from Champaign was elected by a district that is less than 30% Black so too was Rep. West from Rockford. It seems to me that the ones trying to use race illegally are the plaintiffs. Crossover voting has clearly become the norm in Illnois.
Comment by Another Perspective Wednesday, Dec 8, 21 @ 10:21 am
===Pretty cool that Illinois solved racism===
Don’t be daft.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 8, 21 @ 10:24 am
The attorneys for the Democratic Party are correct, with regard to state legislative and even Congressional races.
That said, racial block voting is still happening at the Chicago city government level, a long term effect of the Harold Washington movement and the Council Wars. This is not strictly speaking a direct effect of race though: if you have two white candidates or two black candidates facing off against each other, and one of them can be tied to Ed Burke, the “Burke candidate” is gonna be in real trouble in the Black community. It’s like being on the wrong side of the Civil War as far as Black Chicago is concerned.
This is the kind of deep understanding of the political dynamics of races that political parties understand and the map’s challengers do not.
With all due respect to MALDEF and NAACP, they are non-political observers who have never won an election.
Comment by Juvenal Wednesday, Dec 8, 21 @ 10:28 am
== I would like to see some actual data on crossover voting at the voter level, rather than anecdotal evidence that white folks sometimes elect ethnic minority candidates. ==
Read the briefs. There’s about 200 pages of evidence, not just anecdotes.
Comment by Comedy Gold Wednesday, Dec 8, 21 @ 10:29 am
===Read the briefs===
lol
Yeah, that’ll happen. Some folks just demand to be spoon-fed.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 8, 21 @ 10:30 am
== I would like to see some actual data on crossover voting at the voter level, rather than anecdotal evidence that white folks sometimes elect ethnic minority candidates. ==
Read the briefs. There’s about 200 pages of evidence, not just anecdotes. More than 40 pretty good lawyers spent the past few months duking out this topic and there is more than enough evidence in the record. If you don’t want to read it and prefer to rely on your own opinions or thoughts, that’s your right.
The case, however, is pretty clear cut. There are 177 members of the General Assembly with 48% of the members identifying as minorities. There aren’t 48% of districts with majority minority voters. That is pretty compelling and obvious evidence that white voters cross over and vote for minorities. What’s really telling is that this happens in DEMOCRATIC races but not REPUBLICAN races.
Comment by Comedy Gold Wednesday, Dec 8, 21 @ 10:33 am
== Illinois solved racism ==
All snark aside, the state’s record of electing non-white candidates is relatively strong.
Comment by Roman Wednesday, Dec 8, 21 @ 10:34 am
“Crossover voting in Illinois is the norm, not the exception,”
cc: Chicago Ward Map
Comment by City Zen Wednesday, Dec 8, 21 @ 11:18 am
I do think it’s true, at least to some extent. We should be wary of hyping the exception which proves the rule but someone like Lauren Underwood winning her seat would be pretty fantastical just a few decades ago. Party polarization does seek to trump racial polarization these days.
Comment by Nick Wednesday, Dec 8, 21 @ 11:34 am
The issue isn’t whether there are minority representatives in government, the issue is whether minority voters are represented in government.
Two related but significantly different things.
– MrJM
Comment by MisterJayEm Wednesday, Dec 8, 21 @ 3:36 pm