## Facts

- After the 2010 census, the Pennsylvania General Assembly enacted the Congressional Redistricting Act of 2011, creating an 18-district congressional map.
- The League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania and individual registered voters filed suit in 2017, alleging the 2011 map was an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander under the Pennsylvania Constitution.
- Claims relied primarily on the Pennsylvania Constitution’s Free and Equal Elections Clause (Art. I, § 5), and also invoked free expression and association provisions and equal protection guarantees.
- The Pennsylvania Supreme Court assumed extraordinary jurisdiction to ensure an expedited resolution before the 2018 elections and directed an expedited trial in the Commonwealth Court.
- The Commonwealth Court developed a factual record, including evidence and expert analyses concerning partisan intent, electoral effects, and departures from neutral districting criteria.
- On January 22, 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court declared the 2011 map unconstitutional, barred its use for the 2018 elections, and set deadlines for a remedial plan, warning it would adopt a map if the political branches failed to do so.
- After the political branches did not produce an acceptable remedial plan, the Court implemented its own map with assistance from a court-appointed adviser.

## Issues

1. Whether the 2011 congressional districting plan violated the Pennsylvania Constitution’s Free and Equal Elections Clause by diluting votes through partisan gerrymandering.
2. Whether partisan gerrymandering claims under the Pennsylvania Constitution present a judicially manageable standard or are nonjusticiable political questions.
3. What remedial authority the Pennsylvania Supreme Court may exercise, including imposing deadlines and adopting a remedial map, when an enacted congressional map is unconstitutional.

## Decision

- The Pennsylvania Supreme Court held the 2011 congressional map “clearly, plainly and palpably” violated Article I, § 5 of the Pennsylvania Constitution and was invalid.
- The Court enjoined use of the 2011 map in the 2018 congressional elections.
- The Court ordered the General Assembly and Governor to enact a constitutionally compliant remedial plan on an expedited timeline.
- When the political branches failed to agree on an acceptable plan, the Court adopted a remedial map for use beginning with the 2018 elections.
- The Court grounded its holding on the Pennsylvania Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution.

## Legal Principles

- Article I, § 5 (“elections shall be free and equal”) prohibits election schemes that dilute voters’ power and entrench a political party by depriving voters of a meaningful and equitable opportunity to elect representatives.
- Partisan gerrymandering claims are justiciable under the Pennsylvania Constitution because the Free and Equal Elections Clause supplies a workable judicial standard.
- A finding of unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering may be supported by evidence of partisan intent, durable partisan effect, and systematic disregard of neutral districting criteria.
- Neutral redistricting considerations identified as relevant include compactness, contiguity, population equality, and minimizing splits of political subdivisions, with attention to communities of interest.
- When an existing map is unconstitutional and election timing requires prompt relief, a court may impose remedial deadlines and, if necessary to ensure constitutional compliance, implement a remedial map.

## Conclusion

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court invalidated Pennsylvania’s 2011 congressional map as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander under the state Free and Equal Elections Clause, ordered expedited corrective action by the political branches, and ultimately imposed a court-drawn remedial plan for the 2018 elections when no acceptable legislative remedy was enacted.


League of Women Voters of Pa. v. Commonwealth, 178 A.3d 737 (Pa. 2018)