![US-law](/_next/image/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fs3media.freemalaysiatoday.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F01%2FUS-law.jpg&w=3840&q=75)
The conservative-majority court granted a bid by Republican legislators in North Carolina to suspend the January 9 order by a federal court panel in Greensboro that gave the Republican-controlled General Assembly until January 24 to come up with a new map for US House of Representatives districts.
Two liberal justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, objected to the high court’s action.
The Supreme Court’s decision to stay the order reduces the chance that the current district lines will be altered ahead of the November mid-term congressional elections. The court offered no reason for its decision.
The three-judge panel ruled that the Republican-drawn districts violated the US Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law by intentionally hobbling the electoral strength of non-Republican voters. Two of the three judges also said the plan ran afoul of the Constitution’s First Amendment by discriminating based on political belief and association.
Those judges on Tuesday refused to put the ruling on hold.
North Carolina’s congressional maps were challenged in two lawsuits by more than two dozen Democratic voters, the North Carolina Democratic Party, and other groups.
Under current North Carolina congressional boundaries, Republicans won 10 of the 13 House districts in 2016, despite getting just 53% of the state-wide vote.
The Supreme Court is currently examining two other cases from Wisconsin and Maryland involving claims that electoral districts were manipulated to keep the majority party in power in a manner that violated voters’ constitutional rights.
In the Wisconsin case, Democratic voters are challenging Republican-drawn legislative districts. In the Maryland case, Republicans are claiming Democratic lawmakers drew a congressional district in a way that would prevent a Republican candidate from winning.
The North Carolina dispute centres on a congressional redistricting plan adopted by the Republican-led legislature in 2016. The Republican lawmaker in charge of the plan said it was formed to favour his party because he thinks “electing Republicans is better than electing Democrats.”
“But that is not a choice the Constitution allows legislative map-drawers to make,” the lower court said in unanimously striking down the plan.
Stay current - Follow FMT on WhatsApp, Google news and Telegram