Court Upholds Michigan’s Right to Move Forward with Independent Redistricting Commission

Date
Body

CINCINNATI, OH – Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit unanimously upheld a lower court decision to deny an attempt by the Michigan Republican Party and special interests to undermine Michigan’s voter-initiated Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission by delaying its implementation. Campaign Legal Center (CLC) is representing Voters Not Politicians in the case to protect the commission, and CLC’s Paul Smith gave oral arguments before the appeals court on March 17.

“The decision today affirms the fact that, as U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts said, voters ‘have the power to decide for themselves how they want their government to be structured,’” said Nancy Wang, executive director of Voter Not Politicians. “Over 4,000 applications to serve on Michigan’s first Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission have been processed, and we will continue to do all that we can to get as many people involved in our fair, impartial, and transparent redistricting process as possible.”

“We are pleased with the decision today, which places the interests of Michigan voters first,” said Paul Smith, vice president of Campaign Legal Center (CLC). “Taking partisanship out of drawing electoral maps is critical to advancing the principle of accountability in government. Michigan voters want fair maps. They will not be silenced by special interests, who continue to try and exert their will over the redistricting process. Now Michiganders can continue applying to serve on the commission with the confidence that two courts and four judges have given it the green light.”

The lawsuits were brought by a group of Republican activists led by Tony Daunt, who led the opposition campaign last year, and the Michigan Republican Party, which a U.S. District Court found had gerrymandered the state’s district maps to historical proportions during the most recent redistricting cycle to give themselves “a strong, systematic, and durable structural advantage in Michigan's elections.” 

Applications to serve on Michigan’s first Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission will be open through June 1, 2020. So far, the Secretary of State’s office has processed 4,332 applications from nearly every county in the state.

Issues

We Can Protect Democracy Even as We Safeguard Our Health

Date
Body

WASHINGTON – The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, our Voting Rights Task Force co-chairs, and more than 150 organizations including Campaign Legal Center (CLC) called on Congress to fully fund and direct states and counties to administer the 2020 elections in a safe, fair, and accessible manner. The groups advocated for the implementation of vote-by-mail, the expansion of early voting, and viable in-person voting options. 

“Congress must provide states with at least $4 billion to prepare for the 2020 November and primary elections, and time is of the essence. In the last coronavirus response package, Congress provided only $400 million to states for election assistance. While a step in the right direction, that sum will defray only a fraction of the costs associated with implementing the necessary adjustments to safeguard the electoral process. In its next package, Congress must provide at least an additional $3.6 billion to help states prepare for 2020 elections amidst the COVID-19 crisis,” the groups wrote.

“Although large numbers of Americans will vote by mail this year, in-person voting options remain essential for the 2020 elections to be truly fair and accessible. In-person voting is still necessary, notwithstanding the challenges posed by COVID-19, because many communities in America simply will not have full and fair access to the election without in-person voting options and for others it is their preferred option,” said the groups.  “Accordingly, we must provide safe and effective in-person voting options, in order to prevent disenfranchising any American.  Unless we do so, marginalized communities will be locked out of this election."

Requiring State Presidential Electors to Follow the Popular Vote (Chiafalo v. Washington)

At a Glance

CLC is advocating in favor of state laws requiring that presidential electors follow the popular vote in their state.

Status
Closed
Updated
About This Case/Action

In 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to decide if a presidential elector is free under the Constitution to “vote their conscience” and cast an Electoral College ballot for anyone, ignoring the popular vote of that state.

Electors are the people who physically cast their state’s electoral votes. Colorado and Washington both have laws requiring electors to pledge their votes to the popular vote winner and have empowered state officials to enforce that pledge. The electors have challenged the states’ authority to do this.

Campaign Legal Center (CLC), in partnership with Issue One and Sidley, filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the U.S. Supreme Court on April 8, 2020, arguing that the state laws should be upheld and that the sole function of the presidential electors should be to cast, certify and transmit the vote of the state for president and vice president of the U.S.

The Faithless Elector

In most states, members of the Electoral College are pledged to vote for the candidate that wins the majority of the votes in their state. When an elector fails to vote for the candidate that wins the popular vote in their state, they break faith with the state’s voters.

So far, these votes have not changed the outcome of the election, so the issue has not yet been front and center in voters’ minds.

What’s at Stake

The outcome of this case could put the outcome of a presidential election into the hands of a few anonymous individuals, without legal guidelines on how much money can be spent to influence them.

If the court agrees with the electors brining the lawsuit, the entire Electoral College system will be upended just months before voters go to the polls in the General Election. A ruling to “unbind” presidential electors from their home state voters would create new legal loopholes at the worst possible time.

Numerous federal laws require elected officials and policy makers to follow financial ethics and transparency rules. According to CLC’s Adav Noti, writing for The Atlantic, these rules seek to ensure that officials act in the public’s interest rather than for their own financial advantage.

Presidential electors, however, have never been considered true elected officials or policy makers, so these laws do not currently cover them. So there would be nothing stopping wealthy special interests from creating a bidding war to influence electors to cast their vote in favor of their preferred candidate.

For example, electors could legally accept contributions worth millions of dollars in connection with their official duties, and the public would never know. Allowing faithless electors would invite corruption that current federal law is not equipped to prevent.

Unbinding electors would also require states to reconstruct their presidential election procedures, sometimes at great cost. States would need to urgently reconsider every aspect of nominating and selecting their presidential electors.

The legitimacy of American democracy demands that Americans go to the polls with the confidence that their vote will count and that their election system will be free from corruption. However far from perfect the current system may be, the chaos of an unbound Electoral College would be much worse.

Plaintiffs

Peter Bret Chiafalo, Levi Jennet Guerra, and Esther Virginia John

Defendant

State of Washington