Ohio Congressional Map Challengers Seek to Drop Lawsuits

Voting-rights advocates challenging Ohio’s Republican-drawn congressional map, which the Ohio Supreme Court ruled last year to be unconstitutionally gerrymandered, want to drop their lawsuits, moves that come in the wake of a rightward shift by the court.

The borders of the state’s 15 congressional districts should stay the same through the 2024 elections, according to filings Tuesday in two lawsuits pending in front of the state’s high court. The map, because of the way it was approved, must be redrawn for the 2026 elections, the applications for dismissal note, also explaining that additional litigation could confuse voters over which district they are in.

“Ohioans have borne the considerable costs and frustration of years of districting disputes, with each round of map-drawing and litigation generating additional confusion and concern about the fairness of their representation. After nearly two years of diligently pursuing this litigation, Petitioners have decided that it is not presently in the state’s best interests to continue pursuing relief in this manner,” one of the filings said.

The pair of lawsuits, filed by separate attorneys but heard at the same time, have a tortured history. While a divided state Supreme Court ruled in July 2022 that the congressional map drawn in March of that year by the Ohio Redistricting Commission unfairly favored Republicans—the second such time it made such a finding—the state defendants asked the US Supreme Court to review the case.

The nation’s high court on June 27 decided Moore v. Harper and shot down the “independent state legislature” theory that North Carolina—and separately, Ohio—advanced, arguing that the US Constitution gives state lawmakers nearly unchecked power to set rules for congressional and presidential elections. Three days later, the court undid the Ohio Supreme Court’s gerrymandering decision and sent the case back to the Buckeye State for proceedings consistent with its recent decision.

The Ohio Supreme Court last month asked the challengers and the state defendants to tell the justices how to move forward with the case.

Court Politics

Another complicating factor for the challengers is that the Ohio Supreme Court’s makeup changed in the 14 months since it ruled on the map.

The court was controlled by Republicans 4-3 in 2022. Then-Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor, a Republican, was widely considered a swing vote, and she joined Democrats in striking down multiple congressional and legislative district maps as unconstitutionally gerrymandered.

O’Connor has since retired and was replaced by fellow Justice Sharon L. Kennedy (R), who was one of three to dissent from the opinions striking down the maps. Gov. Mike DeWine (R), a member of the redistricting commission, then filled Kennedy’s vacated associate justice seat with Joseph T. Deters (R), who had been the longtime prosecutor in Hamilton County.

The changes have led many court watchers to believe that the court has moved farther to the right.

Still, some of the map’s challengers on Tuesday tried to argue that they obtained at least some of what they wanted. They said the map they challenged in 2022 had at least undone some of the “undue partisan bias” found in the first go-round.

“For all of these reasons, given that the March 2 Plan is at least a partial remedy, and given the substantial costs and uncertainty that further litigation would entail, Petitioners have decided to no longer pursue their challenge to the March 2 Plan,” the filing said.

A DeWine spokesman declined comment. Spokespeople for Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R) and Republican leadership in the Ohio Senate and House, all of which have involvement in the commission, said they were reviewing the filings.

The challengers are represented by McTigue & Colombo LLC, Elias Law Group LLP, ACLU of Ohio Foundation Inc., American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, and Covington & Burling LLP. LaRose is represented by the Ohio Attorney General’s Office. The Ohio House and Senate defendants are represented by Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP and Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP. The Redistricting Commission is represented by Organ Law LLP.

The cases are Neiman v. LaRose, Ohio, No. 2022-0298, filed 9/5/23 and League of Women Voters of Ohio v. LaRose, Ohio, No. 2022-0303, filed 9/5/23.