HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 3,000 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.congcourts/fjcuisc0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
CASE STUDIES IN EMERGENCY ELECTION LITIGATION
Unsuccessful Injunction Against State Court
Proscription on Political Gerrymandering
Corman v. Torres (Christopher C. Conner, Kent A. Jordan,
and Jerome B. Simandle, M.D. Pa. 1:18-cv-443)
After a state supreme court redrew congressional district lines to
remedy excessive partisan gerrymandering, opponents of the new
lines sought a federal court injunction against the state court deci-
sion. A three-judge district court declined to enjoin the state court's
new lines.
Subject: District lines. Topics: Matters for state courts;
malapportionment; three-judge court; intervention; case
assignment; removal; attorney fees.
Litigation over partisan gerrymandering in 2017 and 2018 included a federal
court challenge to a state supreme court's redistricting the state's members of
Congress. Related actions were resolved in one of the state's other districts.
Challenging Pennsylvania's Supreme Court
According to a federal complaint filed in the Middle District of Pennsylvania
on February 22, 2018, This is an action concerning, inter alia, the Pennsylva-
nia Supreme Court's striking of a validly-enacted congressional districting
plan and issuance of a substitute plan, each action in direct violation of the
Elections Clause of the United States Constitution (the 'Elections Clause').'
Pennsylvania's supreme court declared on January 22 that the Congres-
sional Redistricting Act of 2011 clearly, plainly and palpably violates the
Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and enjoined Pennsyl-
vania from using the plan in 2018 congressional elections.2 On February 5,
2018, United States Supreme Court Justice Alito declined petitions to stay
the injunction.' The Pennsylvania court said that it would begin procedures
to establish new districts unless the other two branches of government sub-
mitted a constitutional plan by February 15. A 139-page opinion issued on
February 7 explained the court's conclusions.' The General Assembly failed
to pass legislation for the Governor's approval, thereby making it impossible
1. Complaint, Corman v. Torres, No. 1:18-cv-443 (M.D. Pa. Feb. 22, 2018), D.E. 1 [here-
inafter Corman Complaint]; Corman v. Torres, 287 F. Supp. 3d 558, 565 (M.D. Pa. 2018).
2. League of Women Voters of Pa. v. Commonwealth, 175 A.3d 282 (Pa.), cert. denied, 586
U.S. _, _ S. Ct. _, 2018 WL 5314946 (2018); see Corman, 287 F. Supp. 3d at 564; see also
Michael Wines & Trip Gabriel, Pennsylvania District Map Is Ruled Unconstitutional, N.Y.
Times, Jan. 23, 2018, at A10.
3. Docket Sheet, McCann v. League of Women Voters of Pa., No. 17A802 (U.S. Jan. 29,
2018); Docket Sheet, Turzai v. League of Women Voters of Pa., No. 17A795 (U.S. Jan. 26,
2018); see Adam Liptak, Justices Decline to Halt Court's Order to Redraw a Partisan Election
Map, N.Y. Times, Feb. 6, 2018, at A10.
4. League of Women Voters of Pa., 175 A.3d 282; see Corman, 287 F. Supp. 3d at 564.
5. League of Women Voters of Pa. v. Commonwealth, 178 A.3d 737 (Pa. 2018).
Federal Judicial Center 11/14/2018
1](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.congcourts/fjcuisc0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)