Coloring Outside the Lines: The Power Play of Gerrymandering in Nevada
April 2022 | Lauryn Shatzel, Staff Writer/Editor
American politicians are always looking towards the next election: how to best serve their constituents, how to enact positive change, and how to keep their positions of power. One method of maintaining political power that has become increasingly more prevalent is the practice of gerrymandering. Gerrymandering can be defined as the manipulation of electoral boundaries in order to favor one group.[1] Two types of gerrymandering are cracking and packing. Cracking divides groups with similar characteristics to limit voting power, while packing draws certain groups of voters into the smallest number of districts as possible in order to strengthen one group’s voting power and weaken another.[2] Voter suppression entails minimizing a group of people’s voting representation to benefit another group. As such, gerrymandering would be classified as voter suppression, and the ramifications go beyond political party lines. Unfairly manipulating elections for a certain outcome is both undemocratic and unconstitutional, so the quickest way to prevent gerrymandering would be in the courts.
Looking at the Supreme Court of the United States, there is a new consensus among federal cases regarding gerrymandering. According to Rucho v. Common Cause in 2019, partisan gerrymandering claims cannot be tried in the Supreme Court because it is a political question beyond the scope of the court.[3] This brings the issue of gerrymandering straight to the state court systems. The highest courts that can look at gerrymandering cases are the United States Circuit Courts of Appeals. The largest Circuit Court is the Ninth Circuit, which includes states such as California, Hawaii and Nevada. Looking at the voting discrimination case Brnovich v. Democratic, the Ninth Circuit found that Arizona’s specific voting policies created illegal discrimination.[4] While the Ninth Circuit declared that Arizona created illegal discrimination through the act of gerrymandering, they did not make a universal ruling on gerrymandering’s constitutionality. This hands-off approach from federal courts leaves the fate of gerrymandering schemes to state judges.
Looking at Nevada specifically, a Republican-supported lawsuit recently went through one of Nevada’s district courts. The issue revolved around Governor Sisolak’s approved new districting maps for the 2022 midterm election, seen here, as it would take away the voting power of rural voters and instead move it towards major cities such as Las Vegas.[5] However, due to time constraints regarding the fast-approaching midterm elections, Senior District Judge Robert Estes ruled that it would be unfair to interrupt the present election procedures.[6] It’s important to note that Judge Estes’ ruling did not uphold the constitutionality of gerrymandering, so there is still a potential for Nevada courts to reassess this issue. However, the state judiciary is generally hesitant to look at gerrymandering cases, so it is up to local advocacy groups to ensure fair representation in elections. This work is already being done, as many locals have lobbied the Nevada legislature for proper voting representation for minorities in Nevada. For example, Make it Work Nevada advocates for voting equity, especially concerning Black Nevadans, considering that 12 percent of Nevadans are Black.[7] With the increasing racial diversity within the state, it is important for that diversity to be properly represented in the new redistricting maps.
While the future of legal consequences against gerrymandering remains grim, the future of fair elections seemingly depends on advocacy groups at the local level. The Supreme Court and appellate courts will not rule on gerrymandering, so it is up to the state courts to make these decisions. However, Nevada will not be changing the state electoral boundaries anytime soon, so the only way to fight against gerrymandering will be through lobbying the Nevada legislature. With enough support, elections can strive to show the racial diversity that is present among the state of Nevada. Until the state courts rule on the constitutionality of gerrymandering, the best way to create this change is for people to get involved with advocacy groups. The more people who get involved, the more likely that politicians will be forced to listen and enact laws to protect Nevadans from electoral gerrymandering.
Sources
Li, Michael and Lo, Annie, “What is Extreme Gerrymandering?” (Brennan Center: March, 2019).
Kirschenbaum, Julia and Li, Michael, “Gerrymandering Explained.” (Brennan Center: August 2022).
“Rucho v. Common Cause.” (Oyez: April 2022).
Morales-Doyle, Sean, “The Supreme Court Case Challenging Voting Restrictions in Arizona, Explained”, (Brennan Center: February 2021).
Snyder, Riley, “Judge blocks GOP-backed redistricting lawsuit for 2022 election.” (Nevada Independent: March 2022).
Ibid.
Calderon Jannelle and Mueller Tabitha, “Minority communities fear redistricting overlook: ‘You can’t ignore us.” (The Nevada Independent: 2021).