• Redistricting

Harper v. Hall

04.28.2023
  • North Carolina
  • Closed

The NRF supported North Carolina voters in Harper v. Lewis, challenging the congressional map as a partisan gerrymander in violation of the Free Elections, Equal Protection, Freedom of Speech, and Freedom of Assembly Clauses of the North Carolina Constitution. The suit challenged the constitutionality of the state’s legislative and congressional redistricting plans, alleging they were unconstitutional partisan gerrymanders that would’ve given Republicans at least 10 of 14 congressional seats and durable legislative majorities even when a majority of voters preferred Democrats. The plaintiffs asked the court to declare the current map invalid, block its use for future elections, and order the creation of a new map that complies with the state constitution.

After a trial court panel of three judges found that the maps were a partisan gerrymander but that this was permissible, the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that partisan gerrymandering violates the North Carolina Constitution (Harper I). The court ordered that both congressional and legislative maps be redrawn to ensure partisan fairness. Shortly thereafter, the North Carolina General Assembly passed proposed remedial House, Senate, and congressional plans. Meanwhile, the Harper Plaintiffs proposed alternative maps for the state Senate and congressional districts. The House plans were enacted on a bipartisan basis.

The trial court appointed special masters to evaluate the remedial plans, and adopted the legislature’s state House and Senate plans, but rejected the state’s remedial congressional plan. The panel instead adopted an improved version of that map that gave both parties the chance to represent an equal number of districts, appropriately reflecting the state’s 50-50 divide.

The Republican-controlled legislature sought emergency relief from the U.S. Supreme Court, claiming that the fair congressional map adopted by the Supreme Court of North Carolina could not be mandated under the fringe “independent state legislature” theory. The Supreme Court denied this request for emergency relief, and the 2022 elections took place using the fair congressional map, a state House map produced through bipartisan compromise, and the legislatively enacted remedial state Senate map (to which the Harper Plaintiffs had objected).

All parties filed appeals with the North Carolina Supreme Court: the legislature appealed the trial court’s adopted remedial congressional plan, and the Harper Plaintiffs (and others) appealed the adoption of the General Assembly’s remedial Senate map. Oral argument occurred before the state supreme court on October 4, 2022.

Meanwhile, the North Carolina legislature filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, which the Court granted in June, in the case Moore v. Harper. Back in state court, on December 16, 2022, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued a ruling in Harper v. Hall (Harper II), addressing (among other things) NRF-supported voters’ appeal of the trial court’s decision to accept the legislature’s remedial state Senate map. The court struck down the remedial Senate map as a partisan gerrymander in violation of the state constitution and remanded it to the trial court to oversee a new remedial map-drawing process. The court also ruled that the remedial House map enacted earlier in the year must be the map used for the rest of the decade. The legislature’s challenge to the court-adopted congressional map was denied.

On January 20, following the state supreme court’s December 2022 ruling striking down the legislatively-drawn state Senate map, the Republican legislators filed a petition to rehear the decision striking down the state Senate map (Harper II), which the court granted. Legislators’ supplemental briefing submitted on February 17 asks the court not only to reverse the decision in Harper II but also to overturn its decision in Harper I, the landmark case that struck down all three legislatively-drawn maps and held that partisan gerrymandering violates the state constitution. Legislators’ briefing asks the court to overturn these cases and allow the legislature to redistrict without “interference.” Republicans waited to file their petition for rehearing until after the court’s composition shifted to a conservative majority, blatantly prioritizing partisanship over a commitment to the court’s reasoned precedent. Briefing completed in early March with oral argument taking place on March 14. Unfortunately, on April 28, the North Carolina Supreme Court held that partisan gerrymandering claims present a political question that is not justiciable under the state’s constitution. Accordingly, the court overruled its decision in Harper I, withdrew its decision in Harper II, dismissed the Harper Plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice, and remanded to the legislature to draw new maps.