Divided Supreme Court upholds Ohio's legislative boundaries
By a 4-3 decision, Ohio's Supreme Court has upheld the legislative map approved last year, saying that Ohio's Constitution does not require political neutrality.
"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 Wilson v. Kasich, Slip Opinion No. 2012-Ohio-5367.
[[In-content Ad]]
Supreme Court Justices Paul E. Pfiefer, Chief Justice Maureen O'Connor, and Democrat Justice Yvette McGee Brown dissented.
“The purpose of the people in enacting Article XI is clear, Brown said. "It was to place legislative apportionment in the hands of a separate board not subject to the control of the General Assembly, the board to be composed of representatives of the people, elected by the people and unconnected with the legislative branch of the government.
“The objective sought by the constitutional provisions was the prevention of gerrymandering. In practice, however, whichever political party has a majority of the members of the apportionment board uses apportionment to favor their partisan interests. The majority’s decision today ensures this will continue."
According to an Associated Press report, "Voters First, a coalition of voter advocacy groups that advanced an unsuccessful 2012 ballot proposal to overhaul Ohio's map-making process, found in a post-election analysis that 97 of 99 Ohio House districts went to the party favored by new district lines. They pointed to the review as proof that map makers, not voters, control Ohio elections."
Auditor of State Dave Yost issued the following statement regarding the Ohio Supreme Court ruling today that the state apportionment board’s redrawing of state legislative boundaries is constitutional:
“I am happy for the state of Ohio to have this legal uncertainty resolved,” Yost said. “However, now is the time to reform the process. No one knows who will be in control in 2020, so this is a perfect window when both sides have as much to win as to lose. Reform should not be put off until the end of the decade again.”
To read the Supreme Court decision, go to www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/ROD/docs/pdf/0/2012/2012-Ohio-5367.pdf