Federal judges order 13 Michigan House and Senate districts redrawn

Lansing — Federal judges have declared 13 of Michigan's House and Senate districts unconstitutional and ordered them redrawn, overturning a key portion of the maps drawn in 2021 by Michigan's inaugural Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission.

The three-judge panel ordered the Secretary of State to refrain from holding elections in those districts until they are redrawn in compliance with the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The significant court ruling Thursday could have broad implications for the 2024 election, potentially forcing neighboring districts to be reshaped, and could influence which party controls the Michigan Legislature.

In their decision released Thursday, federal judges Raymond Kethledge, Paul Maloney and Janet Neff said the commission's experts relied on incomplete primary data to set Black voting age percentages that would guarantee a Black-preferred candidate could make it through the primary to the general election. That information was critical in the Detroit area, where elections are largely decided in the primary.

"Yet these experts told the commissioners again and again — based on general election data alone — that black-preferred candidates would 'perform well' in these districts," the opinion said. "That was a grave disservice to everyone involved with this case, above all the voters themselves."

Kethledge, a 6th Circuit Court of Appeals judge, and Maloney and Neff, district court judges in West Michigan, were empaneled to oversee a trial on Michigan's legislative boundaries in early November and rule on whether those maps were constitutional. Any appeal of the panel’s decision would go directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In a statement Thursday, the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission said it was "aware and disappointed" with the panel's decision and would provide a longer response after reviewing the 116-page decision.

The redistricting commission and the Black Detroit Democrats who challenged the maps have until Jan. 2 to submit briefs addressing how legislative district boundaries should be redrawn.

"We're thrilled that the court unanimously ruled that the challenged districts are illegal and that Black voters in Detroit were disenfranchised," said John Bursch, an attorney for the Black Detroiters who challenged the maps.

"The court has rightly said that the maps can no longer be used, and we look forward to working with the court and commission to draw new maps that ensure everyone's rights are respected."

The judges asked the parties to include their views on the usefulness of a special master to assist the redistricting commission with its redrawing of the map in a "stringent timeframe."

Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson told the court earlier this month that her office needed about four months after a map is drawn to update the qualified voter file in time for the House primary filing deadline on April 23. The secretary's request puts a time crunch on completion of redrawn maps.

Benson's office, which is a defendant in the case, said in a Thursday statement that she would continue to carry out her "ministerial responsibilities to the commission."

"Her priority and role remains ensuring all voters and candidates have the clarity they need to fully participate in all elections and working with clerks to ensure any changes in districts are effectively communicated to all who are impacted," said Angela Benander, a spokeswoman for Benson.

More:'100% about race': Trial examines legislative maps' impact on Black Detroit voters

More:GOP-affiliated group helped fund redistricting suit filed by Black Detroit Democrats

More:Michigan redistricting commissioner's resignation creates vacancy on powerful panel

What a key judge wrote

The legislative district boundaries were drawn by an independent commission that was the brainchild of Voters Not Politicians, a group that aimed to combat gerrymandering, the manipulation of political boundaries to ensure a certain party dominates elections. In 2001 and 2011, the process was controlled by the Republican-led Legislature.

The Voters Not Politicians committee contended in 2018 that the commission "takes the power of redistricting away from politicians and lobbyists and gives it to voters."

But the plaintiffs have argued that the experts guiding the commission consistently pressured its members to lower the number of Black voters in Metro Detroit House and Senate districts out of an effort to "unpack" past districts and achieve better partisan fairness scores across the state.

The result, the plaintiffs argued, was a dilution of the Black vote across spaghetti-like districts that stretched from majority-Black Detroit into majority-White suburbs in Oakland and Macomb counties.

The Voting Rights Act requires that when there is a large, compact minority — such as the Black population in Detroit — those voters cannot be broken up into largely White districts where their votes are diluted and where they are unable to elect a minority-preferred candidate.

The Equal Protection Clause largely bars states from drawing district maps that sort voters primarily by race.

Michigan's redistricting case is unique because, unlike processes led by the majority party of the Legislature, the citizens commission documented every decision in a transcript that runs about 10,000 pages, noted Kethledge, an appointee of Republican former President George W. Bush. That transcript is quoted continuously throughout the federal court ruling.

That record clearly shows the commission relied on its experts and attorney — namely Bruce Adelson and Julianne Pastula — who "expressly told the commissioners scores, if not hundreds of times, to sort Detroit-area voters into different districts on the basis of race," Kethledge wrote.

In many cases, the commission lowered the Black voting age population between 35% and 45% for legislative districts in a city whose African American population is nearly 78%, with little to no primary data showing a Black-preferred candidate could make it through a primary with those concentrations.

The recommendations were guided by an analysis performed by redistricting expert Lisa Handley, who found there was enough White crossover voting in general elections to allow for lower concentrations of Black voters in the new districts. But Detroit area races in heavily Democratic districts are won or lost in the primary election, so an analysis of general election behavior was not useful in determining the chances of success of a Black-preferred candidate, the three-judge panel ruled.

The court's decision rejected the commission's defense that the districts took shape not around race but based on priorities that included partisan fairness and communities of interest. If anything, Kethledge said, those were byproducts of a drawing process driven by lowering the Black voting age population.

"... that the commission put cities like Grosse Pointe, Bloomfield Hills, and Birmingham — some of the wealthiest cities in Michigan, where Porsches and Range Rovers are commonplace, and Cadillacs more numerous than Chevrolets — in the same districts as some of the poorest neighborhoods in Detroit, itself belies the idea that 'communities of interest' were paramount in drawing these districts," wrote Kethledge, who lives in Oakland County.

The record, he wrote, “permits no other conclusion” than that the districts “were drawn predominantly on the basis of race.”

Judge: No 'ill intention'

Neff wrote a short concurring opinion, agreeing the majority had reached the correct decision but arguing they’d been too hard on the commission, Adelson and Handley.

Adelson and Handley were respected experts in the field of redistricting law and Voting Rights Act compliance, and the commission faced a “daunting task” made more difficult by the pandemic and the inaugural nature of their work, argued Neff, another Bush appointee. Unlike other redistricting processes, every word they uttered while drawing the maps was documented and ultimately revealed the process they followed was “fatally flawed," she wrote.

“There was no history to follow or learn from and no role model to lead the way and to set a standard,” Neff wrote. “I do not believe that there was any ill intention by any individual in this case.

Under the court ruling, the following districts will need to be redrawn before the November 2024 election:

House District 1: Held by Rep. Tyrone Carter of Detroit.

House District 7: Held by Rep. Helena Scott of Detroit.

House District 8: Held by Rep. Mike McFall of Hazel Park.

House District 10: Held by House Speaker Joe Tate of Detroit.

House District 11: Held by Rep. Veronica Paiz of Harper Woods.

House District 12: Held by Rep. Kimberly Edwards of Eastpointe.

House District 14: Held by Rep. Donavan McKinney of Detroit.

Senate District 1: Held by Sen. Erika Geiss of Taylor.

Senate District 3: Held by Sen. Stephanie Chang of Detroit.

Senate District 6: Held by Sen. Mary Cavanagh of Redford Township.

Senate District 8: Held by Sen. Mallory McMorrow of Royal Oak.

Senate District 10: Held by Sen. Paul Wojno of Warren.

Senate District 11: Held by Sen. Veronica Klinefelt of Eastpointe.

eleblanc@detroitnews.com