Georgia’s maps are on trial after two years.

[link removed]
09/08/2023

This week, in Alabama and Florida, voters have a chance at fair representation thanks to two recent decisions. After the Sunshine State’s map was struck down, in a fun, anti-democratic twist, the Florida Republicans argued their state constitution violates the U.S. Constitution.

In Georgia, a trial began over the state’s legislative and congressional maps and, in Ohio, the dismissal of a lawsuit means voters avoid a further gerrymandered map thanks to an increasingly conservative state Supreme Court.

============================================================

Incoming, Fair Maps! Two Victories for Voters in Congressional Redistricting Fights
** ([link removed])

Alabama’s congressional map is once again in the spotlight. On Tuesday, in a massive win for voters, federal judges ** struck down ([link removed])
Alabama's new congressional map, ruling that lawmakers defied a prior court order and the U.S. Supreme Court's requirement to draw a map with two majority-Black districts. The court struck down the state's redrawn congressional map and ordered a court-appointed special master to draw fair districts for 2024.

However, the state’s Republicans are still refusing to accept the possibility of fair maps. Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen (R) quickly appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. Additionally, Allen asked a federal court to pause its decision while the appeal is litigated.

Last year, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh ** joined ([link removed])
four conservative justices to keep the map in place due to the proximity to the 2022 midterms. However, Kavanaugh joined the ** majority opinion ([link removed])
in June 2023 that required the lawmaker’s to draw new maps and experts believe a pause of Tuesday’s ruling is unlikely this time around. If the Court declines to pause the decision, then a new map would have to be drawn ahead of 2024.

In another victory for voters, a Florida judge ** struck down ([link removed])
the state’s congressional map over the weekend, ruling that the map — which was ** pushed through ([link removed])
by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) — violates the state constitution by diminishing the voting power of Black Floridians.

The DeSantis map ** eliminated ([link removed])
the former configuration of North Florida’s 5th Congressional District by spreading Black voters across four separate districts. By the state’s own admission, the DeSantis map has violated the state constitution by diminishing the Floridians voting power. The clincher is, however, that they argued Florida’s constitution, in fact, violates the U.S. Constitution.
* The state has already ** appealed ([link removed])
this decision, which automatically pauses the ruling pending further review. If the Florida Supreme Court accepts the appeal, a final decision must be issued by Dec. 31, per an earlier agreement between the parties.

Elsewhere, The Fight for Fair Maps, Or “The Bones of Democracy,” Continues

The trial on Georgia’s legislative and congressional maps ** began ([link removed])
this week. Pro-voting groups are arguing that the districts violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by diluting the voting strength of Black Georgians. The trial is expected to take nine days.

The plaintiffs ** argue ([link removed])
that “the 2020 census data make clear that minority voters in Georgia are sufficiently numerous and geographically compact to form a majority of eligible voters…in multiple congressional districts throughout the state, including an additional majority-Black district in the western Atlanta metropolitan area.”

Rahul Garabadu, one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs, contextualized the importance of accurate, fair representation, “This is about the bones of our democracy. It might just look like lines on a map, but it has very significant implications to the future of this state.”
* Rather than adding another majority-Black district, the pro-voting groups allege that Georgia state lawmakers “cracked” and “packed” Black voters into adjacent majority-white districts.

Litigation was able to proceed thanks to the Supreme Court’s June decision upholding Section 2 in ** Allen v. Milligan ([link removed])
.
** ([link removed])

** Ohio's Congressional Map Is Back in Court ([link removed])

By Rachel Selzer

To the north, Ohio’s seemingly Sisyphean fight for a fair congressional map has come to a halt — for now and probably for better. Yesterday, the Ohio Supreme Court ** dismissed ([link removed])
a lawsuit challenging the state’s congressional map, which was struck down for being an illegal gerrymander, at the request of the pro-voting plaintiffs, who argued that it would be "the best result under the circumstances for the people of Ohio." The court ultimately agreed.

This dismissal brings a partial sigh of relief as the Ohio Supreme Court’s ** newly constituted Republican-controlled majority ([link removed])
became even more ideologically conservative following the 2022 midterm elections. This ideological shift further to the right meant that the pro-voting plaintiffs ran the risk of their lawsuit producing an even more gerrymandered congressional map if their suit proceeded.

It is important to note that Ohio’s legislative map, which has been struck down seven times, is still being redrawn ahead of 2024.
* Also this week in Ohio’s circuitous redistricting journey, a pro-voting group has ** resubmitted ([link removed])
ballot summary language for a constitutional amendment in the state that would create an independent, citizen-led redistricting commission.

Much Ado About Trial Separations in Election Subversion Indictment

All 19 defendants in the 2020 election subversion case out of Georgia have ** pleaded ([link removed])
not guilty and waived their right to an in-person arraignment.

There was a ** hearing ([link removed])
on Wednesday on Sidney Powell and Kenneth Chesebro's motions to separate their trial from the rest of the defendants in the Fulton County election subversion case and each other. Their motions to sever from each other was denied. The judge has ** committed ([link removed])
to an Oct. 23 trial start date for the both of them.

The state of Georgia is ** planning ([link removed])
for a four-month trial, not including jury selection, with more than 150 witnesses.

In Washington, D.C., special counsel Jack Smith has been ** attempting to wrangle ([link removed])
former President Donald Trump. Smith is concerned that Trump’s comments and threats on social media will taint the pool of prospective jurors.
Struggling to stay abreast of all the election subversion indictment updates? ** Use Democracy Docket’s newest resource page! ([link removed])
We are tracking everything you need to know about the former president and his lackeys’ efforts to undermine democracy in 2020.
** ([link removed])

** The "Big One" Missing From Trump's Indictments ([link removed])

By Marc Elias

Discriminatory Signature Matching Bar Too Low for Barr and Rove

A lawsuit filed by Bill Barr and Karl Rove's legal group and others seeking stricter rules for mail-in ballot signature verification in Arizona ** will proceed ([link removed])
. The judge denied requests from the state and voting rights groups to dismiss the case.

Arizona voters who cast an early mail-in ballot must sign an affidavit attesting to their identity; this signature is then compared to prior signatures in the voter’s record to confirm a match. The plaintiffs allege that the secretary of state’s interpretation of Arizona’s 2019 Election Procedures Manual (EPM) governing signature matching procedures violates state law.

Specifically, the plaintiffs allege that county recorders are allowed to compare signatures on early mail-in ballot envelopes from prior elections with the voter’s signature on their current mail-in ballot envelopes in violation of Arizona law, which allegedly requires comparing signatures from a voter’s registration.

Take all of this with a grain of salt, there will be a new EPM ahead of 2024 as required by Arizona law, which may nullify the suit.

Win for Wisconsin Conservative Group, Loss for Voters

A Wisconsin court ** ruled ([link removed])
that the use of the federal National Mail Voter Registration Form violates state law, ruling in favor of a conservative group's lawsuit. The order, which comes from a conservative Waukesha judge, prohibits the use of the popular form for future voter registrations in Wisconsin.

The form, which allows voters to register by mail, is provided to states by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. Prior to today’s ruling, 47 states — including Wisconsin — accepted the form, making it a popular choice for third-party voter registration groups that serve diverse groups of prospective voters.

Although this ruling bans the use of the federal registration form, Wisconsin voters may still opt to register to vote ** online ([link removed])
, by mail, in person at a ** municipal clerk’s office ([link removed])
using a state form or even on Election Day at their polling place.

More News
* As a result of Ohio's new strict photo ID law, there was a stark increase in the number of ballots ** rejected ([link removed])
during the August election compared to November 2022 due to voters lacking accepted identification.
* Civil and voting rights attorney Dale Ho was ** sworn ([link removed])
in as a U.S. District Court Judge for the Southern District of New York. ** Read more about Senate Democrats’ efforts to diversify the federal judiciary here. ([link removed])
* In California, a bill ** aimed ([link removed])
at Shasta County’s plan to hand count passed the state Senate this week. The legislation comes after the county voted to end its contract for voting machines and begin hand counting ballots instead.

OPINION: The Push for Hand Counting: A Step Back in Responsible Election Practices
** ([link removed])

By Sam Oliker-Friedland, the executive director of the ** Institute for Responsive Government ([link removed])
, which helps policy makers find solutions that make government more efficient, accessible, and responsive. ** Read more ([link removed])
➡️
What We're Doing

We are reading ** new research ([link removed])
from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on political polarization in the United States. Here are some key takeaways:
* Emotional polarization — the dislike and disgust between members of opposing parties based not on policies but on identity — began increasing prior to the internet and is growing most swiftly among Americans over 65,
* Emotional polarization is unlikely to be causing democratic backsliding or political violence on its own and
* The normalization of violence by political leaders may provide a sense that acting violently against The Other will be permitted, may not be punished, or could be lauded and turn one into a hero.

Summer break is coming to an end for our podcast, Defending Democracy! Stay tuned for a new episode next week. It’s the perfect time to finish catching up on everything that has been covered so far this year. Listen on ** Apple ([link removed])
, ** Spotify ([link removed])
or ** wherever you get your podcasts ([link removed])
.
** Democracy Docket Twitter ([link removed])
** Democracy Docket Website (democracydocket.com)
** Democracy Docket Instagram ([link removed])
** Democracy Docket Facebook ([link removed])
** Defending Democracy Podcast ([link removed])
We depend on the support of our readers to keep bringing you the latest on the fight for democracy. You can help ** keep our content free ([link removed])
and available for all today. Want to change how you receive these emails? You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.

Copyright © 2023 Democracy Docket, All rights reserved.

Our mailing address is:
250 Massachusetts Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20001