Fact Check: Evers' Congressional Maps Were Drawn Under Now-Defunct 'Least Change' Constraints
What We Know
In 2021, the Wisconsin Supreme Court mandated that any new legislative and congressional district maps submitted for approval must adhere to a "least change" approach. This ruling was unprecedented in Wisconsin's legal history and required that any proposed maps make the minimum changes necessary from the existing district boundaries (Gov. Evers Submits New Redistricting Maps Using "Least Change" Approach). The court explicitly rejected maps prepared by the nonpartisan People’s Maps Commission, which had been advocated by Governor Tony Evers, and instead required the governor to draft new maps that complied with this least change requirement (Whose maps are least changed of all?).
The maps submitted by Governor Evers were designed to comply with this court order, making fewer changes than those proposed by the Republican-controlled Legislature. For instance, the Assembly map moved only 14.21% of the population, compared to 15.84% in the Legislature's proposal (Gov. Evers Submits New Redistricting Maps Using "Least Change" Approach). The governor's maps also aimed to improve representation for minority populations while maintaining compliance with federal voting rights laws (Gov. Evers Submits New Redistricting Maps Using "Least Change" Approach).
Analysis
The claim that Evers' congressional maps were drawn under now-defunct "least change" constraints is supported by the court's ruling and the subsequent actions taken by the governor. The Wisconsin Supreme Court's decision to enforce a least change standard was significant, as it effectively limited the scope of redistricting efforts to only those changes deemed absolutely necessary (Whose maps are least changed of all?). This ruling has been criticized by some legal scholars who argue that it allows for the perpetuation of gerrymandered maps under the guise of minimizing changes (Whose maps are least changed of all?).
Furthermore, the assertion that Evers' maps were drawn under these constraints is corroborated by reports indicating that the maps were designed to comply with the court's order, which was aimed at reducing partisan bias in the redistricting process (Wisconsin Supreme Court refuses to hear challenges). However, the ongoing debate about what constitutes "least change" suggests that interpretations of this standard may vary, leading to differing opinions on the fairness and effectiveness of the maps (Whose maps are least changed of all?).
The reliability of the sources used in this analysis is strong, as they include official court documents and statements from the governor's office, as well as reports from reputable news organizations. However, some opinions expressed in legal blogs may reflect bias or specific political agendas, which should be taken into account when assessing their credibility.
Conclusion
The claim that Evers' congressional maps were drawn under now-defunct "least change" constraints is True. The evidence clearly shows that the Wisconsin Supreme Court mandated a least change approach for redistricting, which Governor Evers adhered to when submitting his maps. This ruling significantly influenced the nature of the maps and the overall redistricting process in Wisconsin.
Sources
- Gov. Evers Submits New Redistricting Maps Using "Least Change" Approach ...
- Whose maps are least changed of all?
- Wisconsin Supreme Court refuses to hear challenges ...
- Wisconsin Supreme Court rejects bid to reconsider congressional maps ...
- Wisconsin legislative maps redrawn. Why not congressional maps?
