Maryland Supreme Court weighs whether redistricting question can go before voters
Tensions continued Thursday as the Maryland Supreme Court heard two hours of arguments over a months-long legal battle about whether a redistricting ballot question should appear before voters in November.
"You are equating that to the ballot question itself. I don't see how the text supports that," Justice Steven Gould said.
Democrats faced questions from the justices as they argued that a ballot question concerning congressional redistricting should be allowed on the November ballot.
If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the ballot question, it could give Democrats a chance to gain control of all eight of Maryland's U.S. House seats.
"The proposal passed by a three-fifths majority of each chamber in the Maryland legislature. Therefore, according to the text of the Constitution, that amendment shall be submitted to the voters at the next ensuing general election in a form prescribed by the General Assembly," Assistant Attorney General Daniel Kobrin said.
"The proposed Constitutional Amendment clarifies that certain standards in the Maryland Constitution apply only to districts used to elect members of the General Assembly; authorizes the General Assembly to grant original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court of Maryland to review the congressional districting plan of the State; and requires the criteria for boundaries of congressional districts to be determined by applicable federal laws."
Republicans argue the language is confusing and improperly combines too many changes into a single question.
They also argue the legislature failed to follow legal deadlines for getting the question on the ballot.
"The legislature itself set these deadlines and then it proceeded to not set up a process that could possibly comply with it. It put itself in that impossible situation, and we think that if the legislature does that, then unless and until it repeals those election statutes, the actors that it told to act in particular ways, they are bound by that," attorney Jeffrey Clark said.
But the justices also questioned that argument, including whether missing a deadline should be enough to prevent the constitutional amendment from going before voters.
"But you would be giving state executive branch officials effectively the ability to nullify a constitutional amendment proposed by the General Assembly by just missing a deadline," Gould said.
The decision now lies with the Maryland Supreme Court and is expected soon.
