Supreme Court lets state legislative map stand

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — The Ohio Supreme Court let stand a newly drawn state legislative map Tuesday in a defeat for Democrats.

In a 4-3 ruling, the divided high court upheld the map approved last year on grounds that Ohio’s Constitution does not require political neutrality in the process.

Democrats, who brought the challenge on behalf of a group of voters, had argued the five-member Ohio Apportionment Board intentionally sought political advantage with the maps as prohibited in the constitution, in a maneuver known as gerrymandering.

Republicans in the case argued the state constitution asks the map-drawing board to consider minimizing county, township, city and precinct splits but sets no absolute rule.

The court ruled that opponents of the maps didn’t present convincing evidence the Republican-controlled apportionment board manipulated the districts for GOP political gain.

“The role of a supreme court in considering constitutional challenges to an apportionment plan is restricted to determining whether relators have met their burden to prove that the plan adopted by the board is unconstitutional beyond a reasonable doubt,” Justice Terrence O’Donnell wrote for the majority.

In his dissent, Justice Paul Pfeifer said the Constitution does not set the stringent proof standard perceived by the majority.

“In order to justify its finding of constitutionality, the majority opinion expresses two conclusions of questionable legitimacy; these anchors of the majority opinion fail the tests of logic and fairness,” he wrote. “First the majority opinion erects a nearly insurmountable barrier to a successful constitutional challenge by assigning to the board’s actions a blanket presumption of constitutionality and requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt to establish that the plan fails to meet all constitutional requirements.

Pfeifer went on, “Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is typically necessary only in criminal cases. Such a high burden of proof in the current constitutional matter turns this court into a rubber stamp, not the guardian of the constitution that it is designed to be.”

O’Donnell was joined in the majority by justices Judith Ann Lanzinger, Robert Cupp and John Willamowski, sitting in for Evelyn Lundberg Stratton, who had recused herself for unstated reasons.

Pfiefer, Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor, and Justice Yvette McGee Brown, the court’s only Democrat, dissented. O’Connor signed both Pfeifer’s and McGee Brown’s dissenting opinions.

Besides the proof burden, the majority cited limits in the court’s ability to judge legislative maps.

Ohio, like other states, redraws its congressional and legislative maps once every decade to reflect population shift records in the U.S. Census.