DETROIT — After a reported death threat delayed its meeting Wednesday, Michigan's redistricting commission held a controversial closed-door session to discuss voting rights issues with its lawyers. The meeting marked the first day of deliberations on its draft congressional and legislative districts following public hearings during which the commission was accused of violating the Voting Rights Act.
Michigan's redistricting commission was supposed to kick off its first meeting Tuesday at 1 p.m. local time, but didn't get stared until 3:17 p.m. after a death threat was reported to law enforcement.
Edward Woods III, the communications and outreach director for the Michigan Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission, told the Detroit Free Press in a text message that the threat came in an email.
Michigan State University Police and Public Safety spokesman Chris Rozman confirmed law enforcement responded to the MSU Union building where the commission met shortly after 1 p.m.
"The email with a threatening message was sent (Tuesday) but opened and read by the recipient (Wednesday). We have documented the incident and our detectives are conducting a follow-up investigation," Rozman said.
"We do not believe there is any safety concern for the community and we have not determined the threat to be credible at this time."
Shanon Banner, a spokeswoman for the Michigan State Police, said late Wednesday the agency is also investigating the threat.
After reconvening, the group kicked off its meeting by passing a resolution to hold a closed-door session with the group's general counsel Julianne Pastula and voting rights lawyer Bruce Adelson to discuss a memo on the Voting Rights Act — the federal law prohibiting voting districts that dilute the voting strength of minorities — and a memo on the history of discrimination in Michigan.
During public hearings, the commission was widely criticized for its decision to eliminate majority-Black districts and was accused of violating the Voting Rights Act. The new maps would violate the rights of Black voters who would be denied an opportunity to elect their preferred candidates under the commission's maps, the head of the state's civil rights department told the commission.
The closed-door session seemed to come at the suggestion of the commission's lawyers. M.C. Rothhorn, the Democratic vice chair of the commission who supported the closed-door session, said "our council is suggesting that we do this" before the commission voted on the resolution.
"They're suggesting it, I trust them," he added.
Two Republican commissioners voted against the resolution. Rhonda Lange, a Republican commissioner, said that "if this commission is working on full transparency, in my opinion, let's be transparent." Republican commissioner Erin Wagner joined Lange in opposing the resolution.
Rebecca Szetela, the independent chair of the commission who backed the resolution, said that the closed session would allow the group "to freely discuss attorney-client matters with our lawyers freely and openly."
The Michigan Republican Party accused the commission of violating the state's constitution. "Michiganders were sold on a commission that would be transparent and accountable in the creation of fair state and federal districts under the constitution," said Gustavo Portela, Michigan GOP communications director, in a statement. He added that the commission "entered a new low in holding a closed-door discussion about the applicability of the Voting Rights Act."
The commission's resolution states that the Open Meetings Act allows the closed-door session because it exempted the two memos from Freedom of Information Act requests, citing attorney-client privilege.
Lawyers cast doubt on that rationale when the commission considered an earlier such meeting to discuss legal strategy related to a delay in the census data needed to draw new districts. A closed-door session on the census delay was never held.
The Michigan Constitution states that the "(t)he commission shall conduct all of its business at open meetings."
Steve Liedel, an attorney and former legal counsel to Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm, told the Free Press earlier that the language of the constitution is clear.
"All means all," he said. Liedel wrote that the constitutional language trumps statute in a tweet Wednesday responding to the move by the commission.
John Pirich, an election law attorney who teaches at the Michigan State University College of Law, told the Free Press earlier that it's not uncommon for public bodies to discuss legal strategy in closed sessions, but the "direct language in the constitution is something you typically don’t see" and could prohibit a closed-door meeting of the commission.
———
