{"id":8855,"date":"2024-02-08T19:37:10","date_gmt":"2024-02-08T20:37:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wifamily.news\/?p=8855"},"modified":"2024-02-08T20:59:48","modified_gmt":"2024-02-08T20:59:48","slug":"will-highlights-inconsistencies-with-courts-political-consultants-and-lays-out-potential-due-process-violation-in-new-redistricting-filing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wifamily.news\/?p=8855","title":{"rendered":"WILL Highlights Inconsistencies with Court\u2019s Political Consultants and Lays Out Potential Due Process Violation in New Redistricting Filing"},"content":{"rendered":"

This post originally appeared at https:\/\/will-law.org\/will-highlights-inconsistencies-with-courts-political-consultants-and-lays-out-potential-due-process-violation-in-new-redistricting-filing\/<\/a><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
The News:<\/strong> The Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) has filed its official response to the Wisconsin Supreme Court\u2019s (SCOWIS) hired political consultants\u2019 analysis of all submitted legislative maps.<\/div>\n
\u00a0\u00a0<\/div>\n
In our filing, we point out that the Court\u2019s so called \u201cexperts\u201d offer arguments inconsistent with both legal precedent and their own previous writings. We also explain how the Court\u2019s addressing the question of partisan gerrymandering without discovery or a trial is a clear due process violation.<\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/div>\n
\n
The Quotes:<\/strong> WILL President and General Counsel, Rick Esenberg, stated, \u201cThe consultants want to manipulate the maps to elect more Democrats who they feel are disadvantaged by the single member geographic districts called for by our Constitution. Whether you agree or not, the Court is obligated to follow the Constitution and not the personal and political preferences of consultants.\u201d\u00a0<\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/div>\n
Luke Berg, WILL Deputy Counsel, added, \u201cWILL\u2019s map was drawn without considering politics, to adhere as closely as possible to Wisconsin\u2019s geography, and the Court\u2019s consultants admit that it performs the best on neutral redistricting criteria. Yet they urge the Court to reject it as a \u2018stealth\u2019 gerrymander, in favor of maps that actually and unashamedly gerrymander in favor of Democrats. Adopting that rationale would be the ultimate bait-and-switch and an egregious due process violation.\u201d<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/div>\n
The Experts Contradict Themselves:<\/strong> WILL recently submitted legislative maps that strongly adhere to the Wisconsin Constitution\u2019s neutral districting criteria. The Court\u2019s political consultants, Drs. Bernard Grofman and Jonathan Cervas, acknowledge this fact; yet, they allege that WILL\u2019s map is a \u201cstealth gerrymander\u201d and that \u201cgeography is not destiny.\u201d<\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/div>\n
But in previous writings, they stated the opposite. They wrote that neutral maps are those drawn using \u201ctraditional good government criteria, with no attention paid to partisan considerations.\u201d They also admitted that Democrats tend to be packed into urban areas, hurting their ability to win more seats. They have also explicitly stated that neutral maps do not \u201ccompensate for the difference in partisan concentration.\u201d All of this contradicts their contemporary criticism of WILL\u2019s map \u2013 which is simply that WILL\u2019s map should not be chosen because it does not guarantee an equal number of seats for both Democrats and Republicans.<\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/div>\n
Potential Violation of Due Process:<\/strong> When it granted this case, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that it would not consider the so-called partisan gerrymandering claims because they present \u201cthe need for extensive fact-finding (if not a full-scale trial).\u201d As a result, the parties have not briefed the issues relating to such claims, much less engaged in the discovery, presentation of evidence, and \u201cextensive fact-finding\u201d the issue requires.<\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/div>\n
Read More:<\/strong><\/div>\n