Shapes on trial: Court's eventual decision will have long-lasting impact on U.S. politics

The U.S. Supreme Court is taking up this week the issue of partisan gerrymandering. Its ruling in the Wisconsin-based case before it could have a direct effect on North Carolina's contested district maps and the overall political landscape as we know it.

At the heart of the argument is whether Republicans, following the 2010 census, knowingly redistricted in several states by means of greater advancements in technology to give themselves an unfair advantage come voting season.

So what? Both parties do the same thing whenever one has the majority over the other. But it isn't that simple. Gerrymandering based on past election results and voting patterns is one thing, but the technological advancements of the day allow pinpoint accuracy when determining district lines according to things such as race. We saw that in North Carolina with the recently tossed-out maps drawn by the GOP-held majority in the state legislature in 2011.

So the arguments being made are that if the Wisconsin maps hold -- and thereby so would the other states' maps, conceivably -- then the advantage gained after the next census in 2020 will only strengthen that party's advantage as future redistricting tightens the GOP's grip on the electorate.

Sounds awfully dramatic, sure. But consider if the shoe were on the other foot.

The real question at hand becomes, should one party have the ability -- does it have a Constitutional right -- to nullify the will of the people by marginalizing the election process into a foregone conclusion based on its ability to cluster the votes it needs into districts it draws for itself.

"What becomes of the precious right to vote?" Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg asked, according to an Associated Press report.

That is a question a lot of people are asking here in North Carolina, and in other states where it is alleged that Republican-held majorities unfairly gerrymandered the districts.

Beyond that, is it really up to the courts to get in between the political processes that determine election outcomes when there is no precedent of a judicial test to determine such a thing, at least when it comes to district lines?

Obviously the conservative thinking here is no. But if the political winds change and the Democrats somehow overcome the gerrymandering this midterm, and then in the 2020 presidential race, they would then be armed with precedent set by the courts and the new census data.

Conversely, if the courts strike down the Wisconsin maps and the other states maps then fall with them, could that threaten the GOP-grip on the coveted majorities it presently holds?

Strictly speaking in nonpartisan terms, it's an interesting time in the political sphere. The court's decision will shape, one way or the other, the course of American politics for years to come.

Published in Editorials on October 3, 2017 11:35 PM