2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Louisiana

[ProgressiveModerate]

For someone who's more legally inclined, how probable are the following outcomes at this point:

1. The current map staying in place (i.e. SCOTUS overruling this lower court)

2. Going back to a 5-1 map (possible the old map)

3. Getting an actually compact map with 2 black seats.

I would assume #3 is by far the most probably outcome by are 1 and 3 possible?

[Oryxslayer]

The state and AA groups (some old plaintiffs some new) are fighting to defend the map as drawn, so there is a very possible situation where the map gets used cause it's just too late to get a sufficient outcome. A reversal of the liberal application of Purcell from 2022.

In terms of SOCTUS, this is a racial gerrymandering claim. SCOTUS has a racial gerrymandering suit before it in the SC case, which approaches things from different directions. In SC the Dems want clean lines, here it's a specific Republican. Which I think shows why it's very possible they rule positively, Racial gerrymandering, unlike the mostly-dem Section 2 VRA claims, is a corrective tool used by both sides. S it's likely whatever ruling comes down in the summer on SC effects this, which is why people are asking them to take a look - a Conservative-led ruling on racial gerrymandering benefits the plaintiffs here.

In terms of other outcomes, the court basically said in their opinion that that is not their job to decide if LA can have two AA seats....which seemingly has already been decided by other courts. We also wouldn't be going back to the 2022 map since when Landry signed the 2-AA map it became the default, and that old map similarly would fail under the standards of this ruling. The most likely outcome if there is to be mapping, at least right now, is just making things more sensible. There is plenty of history of such cases applying to VRA seats: MCI on twitter right now has a few such examples of tentacles in Florida that became sensible performing access districts AA seats, at the cost of not having as many minority voters as in the tentacle.

That's what it looks like right now. Developments may change things. But Graves went in to protect himself not 5-1, and he proved ulterior motives distracted from just creating a second AA seat, motives that subordinated traditional redistricting principles.

 In fact, as I have shown in this thread before, the diagonal can be made sensible, you just gotta pair Johnson and Letlow in a northern seat. Which precludes that option if it isn't a special master doing the mapping. So far the presented clean outcome though is the L shape AA district, something Graves knows likely gives him a home. Though giving power to special masters over racial gerrymandering is often a throw of the dice - maps sometimes change radically to follow communities. In this situation there is a chance that means a seat for the areas east of BR which pairs Scalise and Graves, which would be an outcome adverse to the congressman who backed this suit...

[Stuart98]

This map may be palatable to all parties; eliminates Graves, conforms to traditional redistricting principles (compactness and low parish splits) better than the current map and probably most alternatives, and though the BVAP in the black districts is lower than in other maps (43.4% for 2, 47.6% for 6) both should still reliably elect the black candidate of choice.

[Oryxslayer]

That actually eliminates Scalise, not Graves.  Check where they live. It's what I mean by giving a special master power in racial gerrymandering tends to be a throw of the dice political actors prefer to avoid.

But it is another example of how Scalise deciding to retire at the last minute,  given his health issues and the the House chaos that has pushed others out, would have made both the initial and new situation much simpler.




Also, as a sign of just how give and take things are in LA, Landry tonight signed the court map into law, finally concluding a saga that began a decade ago.

[Stuart98]

That actually eliminates Scalise, not Graves.  Check where they live. It's what I mean by giving a special master power in racial gerrymandering tends to be a throw of the dice political actors prefer to avoid.

But it is another example of how Scalise deciding to retire at the last minute,  given his health issues and the the House chaos that has pushed others out, would have made both the initial and new situation much simpler.




Also, as a sign of just how give and take things are in LA, Landry tonight signed the court map into law, finally concluding a saga that began a decade ago.

Scalise would still run in the 1st and probably win it, though his residence being where it is is annoying.

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

Honestly if Scalise could move to Slidell that’d be great

[Bernie Derangement Syndrome Haver]

Poor Letlow I’d rather have just one Black seat instead of getting rid of her. It’s a shame because she’s the only somewhat decent Republican in the Louisiana delegation. It’s not possible but I would have loved for Clay Higgins to get the axe. Hopefully this new map is reinstated, it’s dumb for this to be happening so late.

[Del Tachi]

Hopefully SCOTUS reverses and we get the Legislature's revised map. However, Letlow shouldn't be completely discounted in a re-draw that makes the 5th a new VRA seat.  She has moderate crossover appeal, and could do quite well among Black voters in Northeast Louisiana (We'll see whether that is enough to counteract Fields' Baton Rouge-area base, but I would not be writing her obit quite yet.) 

[Skill and Chance]

Seems extremely likely this gets Purcelled away and they use the legislature's new map at least for 2024.  The longer term question is whether SCOTUS rules that VRA Section 2 no longer applies to redistricting (perhaps this comes back up in the 2031 mapping cycle?).  That would be an earthquake.

[Atlas Force]

https://twitter.com/mcpli/status/1786233916828852571

[Nyvin]

https://twitter.com/mcpli/status/1786233916828852571

I agree with them, the legislature already had it's shot.

[Oryxslayer]

Seems extremely likely this gets Purcelled away and they use the legislature's new map at least for 2024.  The longer term question is whether SCOTUS rules that VRA Section 2 no longer applies to redistricting (perhaps this comes back up in the 2031 mapping cycle?).  That would be an earthquake.

That's a very long term question, likely depending on new future justices. This is cause the current court has said no to this, and for all the GOP cope to try and woo Kav his statements were clearly not intended to be immediate but rather distant in scope. It's also notable cause the court has had many attempts to overturn victorious section 2 cases appealed to it since Milligan and has rejected to hear them all.


Also, reminder this is a 14th Amendment racial gerrymandering suit (see the SC SCOTUS case on this topic) that seeks to correct for abnormal mapping techniques unnecessarily used in service of Section 2. Tidying up access districts has a rich history, and for now that seems to be the direction of travel.

[Oryxslayer]

https://twitter.com/mcpli/status/1786577590301385123?t=-mZZ101vFHO4N-sXhYknqQ&am...

On the topic of hypothetical master maps not doing what Graves wants...

[Stuart98]

https://twitter.com/mcpli/status/1786577590301385123?t=-mZZ101vFHO4N-sXhYknqQ&am...
On the topic of hypothetical master maps not doing what Graves wants...

https://twitter.com/Stuart98_/status/1786808058435473791

After that modification I devised an even better map that would be attractive to courts due to only splitting 7 parishes while having both the black districts be more likely to perform (48% BVAP/Biden +15.1 6th, 44.6% BVAP/Biden +34.5 2nd) and being, unlike every single Louisiana map in recent history, road contiguous. It would also cause absolute chaos for all five House Republicans, every single one would be getting a radically different seat.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Fair map and compact map of Louisiana lol.

[Stuart98]

Fair map and compact map of Louisiana lol.

troll map

[Oryxslayer]

https://twitter.com/mcpli/status/1787917682681000323?t=ctGut2EZ2P8eEG4kWrgkKA&am...

Also today in the separate state leg case

https://twitter.com/mcpli/status/1787925782054023184?t=Z73ZBQVnJVtwIIx5-IqXXA&am...

[RBH]

here's my "what if the judges are partisan hacks who decide to not create a 2nd VRA district but create a cleaner looking map" map



District data

LA1: 67% White, 69-29 R
LA2: 71% Minority/60% Black, 77-20 D
LA3: 67% White, 71-27 R
LA4: 61% White, 64-34 R
LA5: 61% White, 67-31 R
LA6: 65% White, 65-33 R

The statewide partisan lean is 60-38 R and 58% White on DRA.

Edit: here's the map with Parish lines if it makes any difference

[RBH]

as no doubt mentioned in other parts of the forum, the Supreme Court says "use the 2024 map for at least 2024" without saying much about using it in 2026

[Oryxslayer]

as no doubt mentioned in other parts of the forum, the Supreme Court says "use the 2024 map for at least 2024" without saying much about using it in 2026

Notably the liberals want the process to  have moved forward,  and the conservatives stuck to the purcell rule. Well, if nothing else,  the court stuck to the principle they set in 2021/2 even when the shoe is on the other partisans foot.

With this, the congressional maps are basically in place for November.  Even if the court rules for the plaintiffs in SC, they agreed to a potenial delay of relief after the deadlines there earlier.

[Skill and Chance]

as no doubt mentioned in other parts of the forum, the Supreme Court says "use the 2024 map for at least 2024" without saying much about using it in 2026

Notably the liberals want the process to  have moved forward,  and the conservatives stuck to the purcell rule. Well, if nothing else,  the court stuck to the principle they set in 2021/2 even when the shoe is on the other partisans foot.

With this, the congressional maps are basically in place for November.  Even if the court rules for the plaintiffs in SC, they agreed to a potenial delay of relief after the deadlines there earlier.

Good.  It's reasonable to defer to legislative intent when things are against a deadline like this.

[Nyvin]

This kinda leads to an awkward position for the LAGOP.  In 2024 Graves will be forced out but then in 2026, most likely, Letlow is given a much less favorable district for the Republican Primary.

[Stuart98]

This kinda leads to an awkward position for the LAGOP.  In 2024 Graves will be forced out but then in 2026, most likely, Letlow is given a much less favorable district for the Republican Primary.

A minimal splits map could still draw out Graves instead while making things awkward for Scalise.

[Brittain33]

When was the last time a “this map is probably unconstitutional, but you have to use it for now” decision actually favored Democrats?

[Roll Roons]

When was the last time a “this map is probably unconstitutional, but you have to use it for now” decision actually favored Democrats?

Maybe Ohio? At least the current map allowed Democrats to finally beat Chabot while keeping OH-09 winnable.