MADISON, Wis. _ Two weeks after a stunning election defeat, Wisconsin Democrats won an equally surprising legal victory Monday as a federal court struck down legislative maps drawn by Republicans in 2011.
A panel of federal judges ruled 2-1 that the redistricting maps were "intended to burden the representational rights of Democratic voters throughout the (10-year) period by impeding their ability to translate their votes into legislative seats." Depending on the outcome of a likely appeal, the case could have national implications since it includes a new method of determining whether legislative maps amount to discrimination against voters of a particular party.
"We find that the discriminatory effect is not explained by the political geography of Wisconsin nor is it justified by a legitimate state interest. Consequently, Act 43 constitutes an unconstitutional political gerrymander," the decision reads.
The ruling found the maps drawn for state Assembly districts are unconstitutional, but the decision would alter state Senate maps as well. That's because each Senate district consists of three Assembly districts. The ruling does not affect congressional maps, which were also redrawn in 2011.
The decision also did not include immediate remedies but instead said those would be decided in the coming months after the state and the Democratic plaintiffs weigh in on what ought to be done.
"The court has declared the maps unconstitutional. That's a victory for democracy because the people of Wisconsin have not been able to elect a government that reflects their views for many years," said Sachin Chheda, a spokesman for the Wisconsin Fair Elections Project, a group that backed the lawsuit.
Spokesmen for Gov. Scott Walker and Attorney General Brad Schimel said they were reviewing the decision to determine their next steps.
The decision came two weeks after an election that gave Republicans their biggest majority in the Assembly since 1957. They will begin the legislative session in January with 64 of the 99 seats.
Finding the maps unconstitutional were Kenneth Ripple, a senior judge with the Chicago-based 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, and U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb of Wisconsin's Western District. U.S. District Judge William Griesbach of the state's Eastern District dissented.
Ripple was appointed by Republican President Ronald Reagan, Crabb by Democratic President Jimmy Carter and Griesbach by Republican President George W. Bush.
Redistricting challenges in federal court are unusual in that they are initially heard by a panel of three judges instead of a single judge. Appeals go directly to the U.S. Supreme Court, without making a stop at an appeals court.
The Supreme Court is one member short because of the February death of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia. If the high court were to deadlock, the panel's decision would hold and new maps would have to be drawn.
President-elect Donald Trump is expected to name a replacement for Scalia soon after he takes office in January, but it is unclear how long it will take the U.S. Senate to confirm that person.
In one of the most dramatic changes to the maps, Republicans dramatically reshaped the 21st and 22nd Senate districts in southeastern Wisconsin. One had largely aligned with Kenosha County and the other with Racine County. They changed them so one included the cities of Kenosha and Racine, while the other took up the rural parts of those two counties.
Before, both districts were highly competitive. Now, one is solidly Democratic and the other is solidly Republican.
"It was win at all costs," Democratic state Sen. Bob Wirch said of the changes to his district. "They ignored traditional boundaries between Racine and Kenosha and it was simply rural versus urban map."
The lawsuit represents the last, best chance of Democrats to regain hope of capturing a majority in the statehouse in the coming years.
The lead plaintiff in the case, retired University of Wisconsin Law School professor William Whitford, testified that he was a lifelong Democrat whose efforts to help put his party in charge of the Legislature have been frustrated by the maps adopted in 2011. He and the other 11 Democrats bringing the case are trying to establish a new method for measuring partisanship that could be used to challenge voting maps around the country.
During the trial attorneys for the state defended the maps, saying lawmakers are free to draw lines that help their party. Assistant Attorney General Brian Keenan said GOP lawmakers followed the law in drawing the maps and were allowed to seek partisan advantage when they drew the maps, which were adopted in a law known as Act 43.
States must draw new legislative and congressional districts every 10 years to account for changes in population. Republicans controlled all of state government in 2011 and lawmakers and Walker used their power to approve maps that greatly favor GOP candidates.
The plaintiffs and their attorneys focused on the emphasis that GOP lawmakers put on building the biggest majorities they could. The maps were drawn in secret in the Madison offices of law firm Michael Best & Friedrich, and GOP lawmakers had to sign secrecy agreements to view maps of their districts before they were made public.
The 2012 and 2014 elections showed that the maps for the Wisconsin Assembly are some of the most heavily skewed maps in the country going back more than 40 years, the plaintiffs showed. State attorneys acknowledged that point in court filings.
