Predictably, Democrat Gov. John Bel Edwards has given Louisiana’s state majoritarian institutions new maps that don’t change much and a congressional map that will look exactly the same for this fall’s elections.
Edwards managed this combination by vetoing the identical bills from the recently-concluded special session on reapportionment that left congressional districts largely the same in producing one majority-minority district of the six, letting go into law bills drawing up the Legislature, and signing bills concerning the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education and the Public Service Commission. The bills addressing each legislative chamber effectively add one M/M seat to each while the BESE arrangement keeps two such districts of eight and the PSC retains its one of five.
Special interests and Democrats saw differently the products of the Republican-run Legislature, with that party’s Senate supermajority plus one seat and its being only two seats shy of a House supermajority. They wanted another BESE M/M district and at least one more in each legislative chamber, besides the extra such seat in Congress. But vetoes to reflect those desires never were in the cards, for two reasons.
First, regarding reapportionment of the state’s majoritarian institutions, the Constitution lays out a process where the judiciary resolves an impasse between the executive and legislature, and if Edwards managed to stave off a veto override to create this, the partisan composition of the Supreme Court suggests plans closer to the GOP majorities would win out. However, the Constitution says nothing about failure to reapportion Congress after a census, guaranteeing a trip to the federal judiciary to settle the matter, so there’s light at the end of that tunnel. Second, the vote tallies on the plans suggested only with the congressional map did Edwards have any chance of staving off an override, and not much of one at that: the GOP has a Senate supermajority locked up and with the cooperation of Democrat state Rep. Francis Thompson a solid 69 of the 70 votes needed to succeed.
Almost certainly the plans not vetoed set the maps for the next decade. Maybe the special interests sue, but Edwards’ actions lengthen the odds of their long shot hopes even more. Signing plus a smattering of Democrat votes indicates bipartisan approval, and nobody buys the mealy-mouthed excuse Edwards gave for not vetoing or signing the Legislature maps, which makes these law as if he had signed them – that reconsidering all of this would detract from regular session business – when in fact he wanted to register disapproval without suffering the humiliation of successful overrides. Regardless, this detracts from the left’s potential court arguments that these maps have as a primary purpose dilution of minority representation when the party that attracts overwhelming black support acts in ways to endorse them.
And he may endure override humiliation anyway with the congressional map. Independent state Rep. Malinda White, recently a Democrat, and no party state Rep. Joe Marino, who typically votes with Republicans, consistently voted for the plans, including both congressional ones. Edwards would have to flip both somehow to succeed, but he has to try because in the eyes of a court his resistance provides slightly greater evidence that the plans could be too dilutive, as well as for him not to provoke the ire of his leftist allies if he gave in so easily.
While the Constitution doesn’t provide a lot a clarity on the matter, it appears that the Legislature could schedule an override vote in the middle of April. Should it not or that fail, it has the rest of the session to try again, which almost certainly would produce a plan almost identical to those vetoed, practically speaking something dealt with by Edwards by the middle of June.
Regardless of that timing or even if a successor bill passes and veto occurs and was sustained, the recent U.S. Supreme Court Merrill v. Milligan decision indicates as the path of least resistance Louisiana would operate under the current boundaries for 2022 elections. In that decision, the Court reaffirmed that disrupting electoral boundaries so close to election qualifying, which occurs in the middle of July, would imperil the election process, so the state would stick to what ts has. That case will be extended into the Court’s next term, with a decision unlikely before mid-2023, meaning no mapping will occur at least until then.
Thus, Republicans will try for an override, and if necessary another shot by the end of the regular legislative session about to commence. Litigation will result no matter what, forcing continuance of the current districts since that would be the easiest interim solution. In the meantime, leftist special interests may sue concerning other plans, but these will go on hold while the Court decides just how prominent a role race can play in reapportionment, which also means that for 2023 legislative and BESE races the just-approved maps will apply and will continue to do so after unless, in a decision that would go against the run of play, the Court decides race can be used as the dominant criterion in reapportionment decisions, which is the only outcome that could negate these maps for 2027 and beyond.
All told, Edwards’ decisions almost certainly set in place the new maps for state majoritarian institutions for the next decade, and the same congressional map for at least one election cycle.
No comments:
Post a Comment