ÀÏ°ÄÃÅ¿ª½±½á¹û

Does the Constitution prohibit racial discrimination in redistricting regardless of the size of the group targeted by the state?

This case -- part of a broader challenge to South Carolina's redistricting after the 2020 Census -- involved a racial gerrymandering claim against the State's House district lines. Plaintiffs the South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP and an individual voter challenged the drawing of 29 specific districts as unconstitutional racial gerrymanders. In May 2022, the parties settled their dispute over State House maps, which resulted in redrawn districts in Dillon, Horry, Kershaw, Orangeburg, and Richland counties.

Whether partisan gerrymandering claims are justiciable and whether the plaintiffs in North Carolina and Maryland established that the legislatures had impermissibly sought to benefit one party over the other, regardless of how voters voted.

The ÀÏ°ÄÃÅ¿ª½±½á¹û filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Ohio U.S. congressional map as unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering. The lawsuit seeks to replace the map with one that accurately reflects the will of voters and complies with the Constitution.