Rucho v. Common Cause
Rucho v. Common Cause, No. 18-422, 588 U.S. ___ (2019) is a landmark case of the United States Supreme Court concerning partisan gerrymandering. The Court ruled that while partisan gerrymandering may be "incompatible with democratic principles", the federal courts cannot review such allegations, as they present nonjusticiable political questions outside the jurisdiction of these courts.
| Rucho v. Common Cause | |
|---|---|
| Argued March 26, 2019 Decided June 27, 2019 | |
| Full case name | Robert A. Rucho et al. v. Common Cause et al. |
| Docket no. | 18-422 |
| Citations | 588 U.S. (more) 139 S. Ct. 2484; 204 L. Ed. 2d 931 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Motion to dismiss denied, Common Cause v. Rucho, 240 F. Supp. 3d 376 (M.D.N.C. 2017); redistricting plan held unconstitutional, 279 F. Supp. 3d 587 (M.D.N.C. 2018); stay denied, 284 F. Supp. 3d 780 (M.D.N.C. 2018); vacated and remanded in light of Gill v. Whitford, 138 S. Ct. 2679 (2018); judgment entered on remand, 318 F. Supp. 3d 777 (M.D.N.C. 2018). |
| Holding | |
| Partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Roberts, joined by Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh |
| Dissent | Kagan, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor |
The case was one of three heard in the 2018 term dealing with issues related to partisan gerrymandering used in the districting plans of states. It was combined with Rucho v. League of Women Voters of North Carolina, and its decision included the Court's judgment on Lamone v. Benisek, a partisan gerrymandering case from Maryland. The 5–4 decision, divided along ideological lines, left in place North Carolina's congressional districts, which favor the Republican Party, and Maryland's congressional districts, which favor the Democratic Party.