New Mexico GOP's 'gerrymandering' case will proceed after Democrat arguments rejected
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
A lawsuit against New Mexico Democrats accusing them of gerrymandering will move forward in Fifth Judicial District Court after the State Supreme Court issued a Wednesday order rejecting arguments against the case by Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s administration.
The debate centered around a new Congressional district map approved by state officials and signed into law by Lujan Grisham in 2021 that the GOP argued was developed to intentionally curb Republican influence.
The map was approved during a special session of the Democrat-controlled Legislature and drew immediate backlash from local officials in southeast New Mexico who argued a conservative stronghold was being diluted.
More: Officials express optimism, concern over impending State Legislature redistricting vote
The map divided Lea County in half – Lea now straddles the border between the Second and Third congressional districts – and added parts of Albuquerque to the southern Second Congressional District (CD2).
Republicans argued this change to CD2 was the cause of former-U.S. Rep. Yvette Herrell, strongly supported in deep-red southeast New Mexico, losing the seat to U.S. Rep Gabe Vasquez in 2022.
She had previously won the seat in 2020 against former-U.S. Rep. Xochitl Torres Small, who defeated Herrell in 2018 after Republican Party of New Mexico Chairman Steve Pearce vacated the seat in a losing bid for the governorship.
More: Southeast New Mexico city leaders question accuracy of 2020 U.S. Census
In the Wednesday order from New Mexico’s Supreme Court, the case was allowed to proceed in the lower court and justices called on the court to resolve the matter by Oct. 1.
Th Supreme Court also said in its unanimous ruling that the partisan gerrymandering claim must be evaluated using a three-part test described in a 2019 opinion issued by Associate Justice Elena Kagan, to examine the intent to burden voters based on their voting history, the actual effects of the action, and the link between the two.
Justices did say that some gerrymandering is allowable under New Mexico law but ordered the Kagan test be used to decide if the new map runs afoul of the law.
This means the plaintiffs would have to prove Democrats redrew the map to keep them in power, and that they achieved what they wanted to degree that was “egregious in intent and effect.”
Lujan Grisham spokesperson Caroline Sweeney said the administration was confident the redistricted map would hold up in court.
"The decision issued by the New Mexico Supreme Court on Wednesday provided guidance on what should happen next at the district court level," she said. "We believe the court will find that the maps at-issue meet appropriate legal scrutiny."
State Sen. David Gallegos (R-41) of Eunice was listed as a plaintiff in the case.
He said Republicans are hoping to get the map reversed ahead of the next election cycle in 2024.
“If we can get this done relatively soon, then we might be able to have this in place before the next election cycle,” Gallegos said.
More: Vasquez, Herrell at 50-50 split for votes in race for New Mexico's 2nd US House District
He pointed the redrawn CD3 that placed some of the voters in Hobbs in a district shared by Las Vegas, almost 300 miles north.
“They’re just totally different populations,” Gallegos said. “It would be hard for me to believe that they would agree on any point.”
He said he was surprised the State Supreme Court agreed to proceed with the case, as Gallegos contended the court tends to side with Democrats in Santa Fe over the rural communities of southern New Mexico.
More: Republican Party cruises to victory in southeast New Mexico State House races
“I think we have a really good game plan. I look forward to that day in court, and seeing what we can do with these maps,” he said. “I think we need to put them back to what they were. When they separated Hobbs, they took it to a whole 'nother level.”
With a booming oil and gas industry situated in the Permian Basin, Gallegos said population increases in the region were likely to continue, meaning congressional lines could be redrawn.
But he said the districts should be consistent in representing the different regions and needs throughout New Mexico.
“Before, we had more cohesive areas,” Gallegos said. “When you have population growth, you have to expand. But not like this. They’re breaking up Eddy and Lea counties to dilute Republican votes.”
In a February 2022 motion to dismiss the case filed by attorneys for Lujan Grisham and Lt. Gov. Howie Morales, the Democrats argued the new district map was intended to combine rural and urban voters in each district.
This was intended, the motion read, to ensure congressional members represented both urban and rural constituencies.
The defendants also argued there was no substantial way to determine if illegal gerrymandering had occurred in drawing the maps.
“In sum, New Mexico law does not provide any standards necessary for the Court to determine the question plaintiffs essentially raise: ‘how much partisan dominance is too much?’” the motion read. “Without such standards, the courts should refrain from diving into the political thicket.”
Adrian Hedden can be reached at 575-628-5516, achedden@currentargus.com or @AdrianHedden on Twitter.
This article originally appeared on Carlsbad Current-Argus: New Mexico Supreme Court calls for 'gerrymandering' case to proceed
