by Jeff Wice & Alexis Marking
REDISTRICTING
Onondaga County: County Legislative Map Challenge Moves To Trial
Background: After months of delay, the challenge to the 2021 Onondaga County legislature’s redistricting map is finally moving to trial later this month. In Ryan et al v. McMahon, the plaintiffs are challenging the GOP-drawn map over violations of the new criteria included in the state Municipal Home Rule Law.
In the litigation, the county defendants have submitted two proposed maps to the court. The first map, known as the LDRC map, was prepared by the Legislative District Revision Commission. The second map, known as the “Glazier map,” was prepared by county employee Travis Glazier and was signed into law by the county executive in December 2021 after approval by the county legislature. Both maps are alleged to be unlawful as they violated both the Onondaga County Charter and the state Municipal Home Rule Law.
The plaintiffs argue that the county defendants violated the Onondaga County Charter when they formed the Legislative District Revision Commission. The county charter requires that the Commission be created after census data is available. However, the Republican majority in the legislature formed the Commission before this data was released, violating the charter.
The defendants also allegedly violated the county charter by voting on the Commission’s proposal instead of enacting a proposed local law after a public hearing, as required. The county charter grants no authority to vote on the proposal.
Lastly, the county executive vetoed the LDRC map, a power not granted by the county charter, again allegedly violating it the charter.
The LDRC maps violated the Home Rule Law due to the populations of District 12 and District 15. According to the law, “the difference in population between the most and least populous district shall not exceed five percent of the mean population of all districts.” District 12 had 26,734 people, while District 15 had 29,137. The mean population is 28,030; five percent of this being 1,407.5. The population difference is 2,403, which is 8.57% of the mean, violating the law’s maximum of an overall deviation of 5%.
The Glazier map allegedly violated the Onondaga County Charter when it was created by Glazier. The county charter requires the legislature to draft a proposed map. In this case, Glazier was employed by the county executive and not the county legislature.
The Glazier map also allegedly violated the state Home Rule Law by not maintaining the cores of existing districts and communities of interest, including Syracuse’s African American community, which was split into different districts, reducing its ability to elect representatives from the same community of interest. It also failed to maintain communities in Geddes, Salina, Manlius, Solvay, Liverpool, Mattydale, and Lyncourt. Dividing the University area into three districts further violated the law by discouraging efficient election administration.
Additionally, the maps were not compact, violating the Home Rule Law’s requirement for compact districts. The plaintiffs’ expert found the Glazier map was less compact than it should be, violating this legal requirement. The defendants also failed to consult experts or consider public feedback.
Lastly, the Glazier maps diluted the voting power of the African American community in Syracuse’s south side by splitting their community, violating the law’s requirement to protect the equal opportunity of racial minorities to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice. The county charter also requires consideration of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause, which was ignored by Glazier, who admitted he did not consider the African American community as a distinct minority group when redrawing the districts.
Defendant County’s’ Arguments for Dismissing the Case: The county argues that the plaintiffs’ first cause of action, which challenges the procedural aspects of the redistricting process, should be dismissed as it is time-barred, claiming it should have been filed as an Article 78 proceeding within four months. They also contend that this cause of action fails to state a claim because the LDRC maps were vetoed and replaced by the adopted maps. For the second and third causes of action, which challenge the substance of the maps, the defendants argue that the case must be dismissed due to the failure to name all 17 County Legislators as necessary parties. Additionally, they assert that the plaintiffs’ claim for attorneys’ fees should be dismissed since there is no legal agreement or statute authorizing such an award.
Plaintiffs’ Arguments Against the Motion to Dismiss: The plaintiffs argue that their action has been properly commenced as a declaratory judgment action to challenge the legislative acts of the Onondaga County Legislature in enacting redistricting maps, and not as an Article 78 proceeding. They emphasize that the local law adopting the legislative district maps is a legislative act that can only be challenged through a declaratory judgment action. Moreover, the plaintiffs claim that the enacted redistricting maps violate the Municipal Home Rule Law and the Constitution by diluting the voting power of Democratic and minority voters. They also argue that both the County Executive’s veto of the LDRC map and the Legislature’s enactment of the Glazier map were outside of the Executive’s authority. The plaintiffs further believe they are entitled to recover attorneys’ fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 since they are bringing a constitutional claim to court.
Defendant County’s Arguments on the Merits of the Petition: In their motion for summary judgment, the county defendants assert that the Legislature properly enacted the Glazier Map without improperly delegating authority. They maintain that the assistance provided by executive branch personnel did not constitute an improper delegation of legislative power. Additionally, they argue that the Glazier Map complies with all relevant laws, including MHRL § 34(4), as the population deviation between districts is under 5%, districts are contiguous and compact, and computer simulations indicate that the map was not drawn to discriminate against minorities or favor any political party. The defendants also note that the map maintains the majority of the previous district cores and avoids splitting municipalities whenever possible.
N.Y. VOTING RIGHTS ACT
NY Attorney General Releases Final State Voting Rights Act Preclearance Rules
The New York Voting Rights Act’s preclearance section, which requires certain local jurisdictions throughout the state (“covered entities”) to submit certain types of voting- and election-related changes (“covered policies”) to the OAG’s Civil Rights Bureau (“CRB”) or to a designated court before they can be enacted or implemented, takes effect beginning on September 22, 2024. To provide transparency and guidance to covered entities and the general public, and to ensure that preclearance is administered efficiently and effectively, the OAG has issued a final rule, which can be viewed on its website.
A notice of proposed rulemaking was published on the OAG website on May 28, 2024, and in the State Register on June 12, 2024, and a public comment period was held through August 12, 2024. The final rule will be published in the State Register on September 11, 2024, and will take effect on September 22, 2024. The rule contains information regarding preclearance submission and review procedures, the legal standard that will be used to analyze submissions, covered entities, and covered policies.
More information on the new rule will be provided in future issues of this update. New York Law School’s Elections, Census & Redistricting Institute is also providing guidance and assistance to local governments and activists on how to comply with the new preclearance requirements.
ELECTIONS
ERA Amendment Without Abortion Reference
A New York court state supreme court judge in Albany County upheld the State Board of Elections’ decision not to use the term “abortion” in the language of the November ballot question for a proposed state constitutional amendment. On August 2nd, petitioners Victoria Fernandez and Kathrine Hauser challenged the language of this amendment insinuating its failure to comply with the state’s plain language law. The amendment aims to protect pregnancy, gender identity, and reproductive rights. The state’s plain language law for ballot explainers requires that the amendment’s wording does not exceed the level of an eighth grader’s comprehension. According to the petitioners, terms such as “abortion” and “LGBT” would better convey the purpose of the amendment.
Moreover, they argued that the Board’s wording suggested that the amendment applied to private entities and focused too much on the legal mechanics rather than the policy change, which might confuse voters. The court found the Board’s terms like “pregnancy, gender identity, and reproductive rights” were sufficiently clear, not requiring substitution with “LGBT” or “abortion.” However, it agreed with the petitioners that the Board’s language did not comply with plain language requirements by emphasizing legal mechanisms over practical effects and ambiguously suggesting the amendment’s application to private entities. The court ruled that while the specific terms were understandable, the ballot’s overall phrasing violated plain language standards by not adequately conveying the amendment’s practical implications and its scope of application, thus requiring revision to ensure clarity for voters.
NYS Board of Elections Promotes College & University Student Voting
The State Board of Elections is urging college and university students to register to vote through social media outreach. The Board is asking students whether they are registered to vote and if they have problems accessing voter registration. Students can register through Online Voter Registration (OVR) and the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) program using the New York State Online Voter Registration Portal. To register online, prospective voters will need a NY.Gov ID. If you have previously used a NY.Gov ID with another agency, you may use the same login to access the Online Voter Registration portal. If you have not used a NY.Gov ID you will need to create an account.
Students can register in person at a local board of elections office or several state agencies like the DMV or the Department of Health. The NVRA program allows eligible New Yorkers to register to vote through several state agencies. For more information or to register to vote, to go https://linktr.ee/nysboe
AROUND THE NATION
Georgia: Democrats File Lawsuit Seeking to Prevent Election Count Delays
The Democratic National Committee, Congressional candidates, and other state voters filed a lawsuit last week in state court (Abhiraman et al. v. Georgia State Election Board) challenging two recently enacted election certification rules passed by a 3-2 vote by the Georgia State Election Board: The Reasonable Inquiry Rule and the Examination Rule. Both rules give county board members expanded and misleading roles in the election process using ambiguous language that is contradictory to Georgia Law.
As reported by the New York Times and other media, efforts are underway in swing states by Republicans to find ways to delay finalizing votes in states to prevent the presidential election from being called, resulting in the election being decided by the currently GOP-controlled U.S. House of Representatives.
The Reasonable Inquiry Rule states that election officials must “conduct a ‘reasonable inquiry’ prior to certification”. The Examination Rule permits individual county board members “to examine all election related documentation created during the conduct of elections” prior to certifying the returns.
Petitioners argue that Georgia law states that certification is mandatory as defined by the statute language “shall be certified” and timing is mandated by statute “…no later than 5:00 P.M. on the Monday following the [election]”. Certification is not up to the discretion of a county level superintendent. Moreover, the terms “reasonable inquiry” and “all election related documents” are too ambiguous and will lead to confusion and further delays during the critical time of conducting the statutory requirements of counting and canvassing.
They further point out that the certification process is one of mathematical accuracy only and not one to address other electoral issues, irregularities or alleged frauds. Those issues are dealt with through the established pre- and post-election systems. Concerns and challenges, handled through the courts, can be filed and remedied after certification and if the findings change the results, returns can be re-certified.
County level certification is the first step, in the multi-tiered system. The lawsuit states that allowing a county to delay or withhold certification with these new rules, endangers the integrity and timing of the certification at the Secretary of State, Governor, and Federal levels. These delays could potentially disenfranchise valid legal Georgia voters of their fundamental right to vote.
Overall, the suit is asking the court to declare that existing Georgia Election law makes certification of the election mandatory, and that the new laws must comply with the Georgia Administrative Procedure Act.
Tennessee: In August, Tennessee voters and a coalition of civil rights organizations filed a lawsuit against Tennessee’s Governor, Secretary of State, Coordinator of Elections, and the State Election Commission and its committee members. The lawsuit challenged Tennessee’s enacted congressional and state Senate districts as unconstitutional racial gerrymanders.
INSTITUTE RESOURCES
The New York Elections, Census and Redistricting Institute has archived many resources for the public to view on our Digital Commons Page.
Our Redistricting Resources page contains resources on the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act. You can access the page
here: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_resources/
Archived Updates can be accessed
here: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/redistricting_roundtable_updates/
Please share this weekly update with your colleagues. To be added to the mailing list, please contact Jeffrey.wice@nyls.edu
The N.Y. Elections, Census & Redistricting Institute is supported by grants from the New York Community Trust, New York Census Equity Fund, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, and the New York City Council. This report was prepared by Jeff Wice with Ahmed Hussein, Jennifer Hutz & Alexis Marking.